UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY / / / T

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY / / p6/ T£.• REGIONS / / Gf TO? 77 WEST JACKSON BOULEVARD

i> x*- CHICAGO. IL 60604-3590*< PRO^

REPLY TO THE ATTENTION OF

November 6, 1997 SR-6J

Mr. Larry R. SweeneySenior Project ManagerEarth Sciences Consultants, Inc.One Triangle DriveExport, Pennsylvania 15632

Re: Completed Data Validation Review Forms for 3/97 Survey

Dear Mr. Sweeney:

Enclosed is the' data validation review forms completed by ouroffice for analytical data generated by your March 1997 survey atthe Industrial Excess Landfill site in Uniontown, Ohio. Ingeneral, the data is useable with some qualifications. Thequalifications are explained in detail in the narrative portionof the report. There are, however, some pesticide results whichhave been deemed unusable for use (i.e., a qualifier designationof UR"). If you want to discuss the unusable portion of the datapackage, I will be happy to arrange a meeting between ourrespective laboratory personnel. Please contact me regardingyour decision on this matter.

Your cooperation on this matter is appreciated. If you have anyquestions, kindly contact me at (312) 886-6195.

Sincerely,

Ross del RosarioRemedial Project Manager

Enclosures

cc: Larry Antonelli (w/o encl.)OEPA-Northeast District

Recycled flecyclable*Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Recycled Paper (40% Postconsumer)

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYREGION 5

77 WEST JACKSON BOULEVARDCHICAGO, IL 60604-3590

REPLY TO THE ATTENTION OF:

MEMORANDUM

DATE:

SUBJECT:

FROM:

TO:

SRT-4J

November 6, 1997

Review of the PRP Organic Data analyzed by Lancaster Laboratories,Ross Analytical, and Antech Ltd. from the Excess Industrial Landfill

Richard L Byvik, ChemistTechnical Support Section

Rosauro DelrosarioRemedial Project Manager

I have read the Lockheed/ ESAT data review of the PRP organic data from the Excess IndustrialLandfill. Sixty-one water samples were analyzed for Volatile Headspace Hydrocarbons and CO2by Lancaster Laboratories. Ross Analytical analyzed 2 Summa* canisters for Volatile OrganicAnalysis (VOA) and Permanent Gases. Eighty-one water samples were analyzed by Antech Ltd.for VOA, Semivolatile Organic Analysis (SVOA), and Pesticides/PCBs (Pest/PCBs). The dataare acceptable and useable with the qualifications described in the case narratives.

The analysis of 61 water samples by Lancaster Laboratories for Volatile HeadspaceHydrocarbons and CO2 was acceptable. Several samples required dilution due to high levels ofMethane, and the laboratory properly reported the results. The analysis of the 2 Summer* canistersanalyzed for VOA and Permanent Gases by Ross Analytical was satisfactory, as well.

Antech Ltd. analyzed 81 water samples for VOA, SVOA, and Pest/PCBs. The VOA and SVOAtarget compounds were identified and their Contract Required Quantitation Limits (CRQLs)properly reported. The SVOA and most of the VOA compounds were properly quantitated.Common laboratory contaminants were reported in some of the VOA and SVOA method blanks.Tentatively Identified Compounds (TICs) were not reported in the VOA method blanks, butTICs were found in some of the SVOA method blanks. The surrogates in SVOA sample GW-D10 had 0% recovery, and the results for this sample are considered unusable.

Recycled/Recyclable-Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Recycled Paper (40% Postconsumer)

In the analysis of the Pest/PCBs by Antech Ltd. several deficiencies were noted. The GCresolution check mixture did not meet the 60% resolution criteria for Endosulfan I, hence, allresults for Endosulfan I should be considered unusable, qualified R. The Florisil cartridge checkfailed the QC criteria, therefore, all Pest/PCBs analytical results are estimated, qualified J.Antech Ltd. was aware of the Florisil cartridge lot failure, but continued to use that lot ofFlorisil cartridges. The recovery for alpha-BHC, gamma-BHC, Endosulfan I, 4,4'-DDT,Methoxyclor, and TCMX was below 70%, ergo, results for these compounds are biased low andconsidered estimated, qualified J. Pest/PCBs compounds were found in most of the methodblanks, and 2 method blanks reported Pest/PCBs above the detection limits. In the Pest/PCBssamples, GW-D09, GW-D17, GW-D20, GW-I09, GW-S3, GW-S5, GW-S07, GW-S09, GW~S20, GW-S21, GW-S26, Method Blank2 3-19-97, and Method Blank 3-21-97, the surrogates,TCMX and DCB, had 0% recovery, therefore, positive analysis results for these compounds areestimated, qualified J, and non-detects are considered unusable, qualified R. The lab Antech Ltd.improperly used the "D"(E)iIution) flag on the Pesticide Form II to exclude the 0% recoveries,moreover, no samples were diluted. For the Pest/PCB Matrix Spike/Matrix Spike Duplicatesample, GW-I3MS, the recovery was 0% for heptaclor and dieldrin, therefore, positive results forthese compounds in the unspiked sample should be considered estimated, qualified J, and non-detects are considered unusable, qualified R. The GC baseline for the Pest/PCS analysis was notacceptable. The Pest/PCBs compounds were not properly quantitated. The reported Pest/PCBsresults do not match the raw analysis data from the GC/ECD chromatograms, hence, thePest/PCBs analysis results should be considered estimated qualified J.

PAGE -2 -

The following definitions provide brief explanations of the national qualifiers assigned to results inthe data review process. If the Regions choose to use additional qualifiers, a complete explanation of thosequalifiers should accompany the data review.

Li - The analyte was analyzed for, but was not detected above the reported sample quantitationlimit

J - The analyte was positively Identified: the associated numerical value is the approximateconcentration of the analyte in the sample.

N - The analysis indicates the presence of an analyte for which there is presumptive evidence tomake a "tentative identification."

NJ - The analysis indicates the presence of an analyte that has been "tentatively identified" andthe associated numerical value represents its approximate concentration.

L J - The analyte was not detected above the reported sample quantitation limit. However, thereported quantitation limit Is approximate and may or may not represent the actual limit ofquantitation necessary to accurately and precisely measure the analyte in the sample.

R - The sample results are rejected due to serious deficiencies in the ability to analyze thesample and meet quality control criteria. The presence or absence of the analyte cannot beverified.

Regional Transmittal Form

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYREGION V

DATE : If-Of-SUBJECT:

FROM:

Review of DataReceived for Review on

Stephen L. Ostrodka, Chief (HSRL-5J) / .Superfund Technical Support Section / t-

TO: Data User:

We have reviewed the data for the following case:

SITE NAME:

CASE NUMBER: fKl

Number and Type of Samples: $4 (

Sample Numbers:

Laboratory:

Following are our findings:

cta-t<c

Hrs . for Review:

A/ ft ?

"40 3

CC: Cecilia MooreActing Region 5 TPOMail Code: SM-5J

Laboratory: Antech Ltd. Case: PRPSite: Industrial Excess Landfill (OH)

SDG#: 1097ET

The package for this SDG contains 17 unfiltered water samples and3 unfiltered field duplicates analyzed for total metals. Thesamples are 1EQ-04, 1EQ-05, 1GW-D3, 1GW-I7, 1GW-S4, GW-D07, GW-D11,GW-D28, GW-I11, GW-I13, GW-I15, GW-I21, GW-I25, GW-I26, GW-I27, GW-S15, GW-S17. The duplicates are GW-I15D, GW-I25D and GW-S17D.

The field duplicate results were not reported on Forms I and werereported on Forms VI (duplicate).

ICP ANALYSES: The digestion duplicate (GW-I27D) audits for Cr(difference > CRDL), Fe (difference > CRDL) and Mn (difference >CRDL) are out of control. All Cr, Fe and Mn results are estimated(J) due to poor precision. The laboratory did not flag (*) for theCr results on Forms I.

The digestion duplicate (GW-I27D) audits for Ni (200.0% RPD) and Pb(200.0% RPD} were flagged by the laboratory; however, the duplicatedifferences did not exceed the technical criterion (+/- CRDL) forwater samples. All Ni results are acceptable. Pb results are notqualified on this basis and are qualified below.

The digestion duplicate (GW-I27D) audits for As (200.0% RPD) and Cu(27.6% RPD) were not flagged by the laboratory because theduplicate difference did not exceed the technical criterion (+/-CRDL) for water samples. All As and Cu results are acceptable.

The field duplicate (GW-S17D) audits for Al (39.6% RPD), Cu (61.3%RPD} and Zn (44.0% RPD) and the field duplicate (GW-I15D) auditsfor As (47.7% RPD), Be (20.3% RPD), Cd (33.7% RPD), Co (200.0%RPD), Cr (28.6% RPD), Cu (36.7% RPD), Ni (26.0% RPD} and V (200.0%RPD) were not flagged by the laboratory because the duplicatedifference did not exceed the technical criterion (+/- CRDL) for

Reviewed by: r^' VTVV-^___________ Lockheed/ESATDate: 1/c-ii-c/7 U

ESAT-5-041.1

water samples. All Cu, AS, Be, Cd, Co, Cr, Ni and V areacceptable. Al and Zn results are not qualified on this basis andare qualified below.

The field duplicate (GW-I15D) audits for Al (47.1% RPD), Fe (36.6%RPD), Mn (25.2% RPD), Pb (42.5% RPD) and Zn (39.3% RPD) are out ofcontrol. All Al, Pb, and Zn results are estimated (J) due to poorprecision. Fe and Mn results are affected by poor precision butremain qualified as stated above.

The matrix spike result for Ba on GW-I27 was missing from the rawdata due to the copy error and could not be verified. All Baresults are estimated (J) due to unknown bias.

LCS concentration readings for Ca, Mg, K and Na were unusually lowor less than the IDL. Control limits for these analytes were notlisted on Form VII. The reviewer must conclude that the LCS werenot spiked for these analytes. Since no LCS data are available,all Ca, Mg, K and Na data are estimated (J) due to unknown bias.

The CCB contains K (897.4 ug/L) . The K results for 1GW-D3, 1GW-I7,1GW-S4, GW-D07, GW-D28, GW-I11, GW-I21, GW-I15, GW-I25, GW-I26 andGW-I27 are affected contamination but remain qualified as stated.

The CCV3 for Tl was incorrectly reported on Form II (Part 1). Thecorrect value for CCV3 should be 88.59 ug/L which is out ofcontrol. The ICB for Tl was incorrectly reported on Form III. Thecorrect value for ICB should be -3.4 ug/L(B). The laboratoryincorrectly reported the result for GW-I27 as less than the IDL.The correct value for GW-I27 is 3.4 ug/L (B). The CCB contains Tl(4.4 ug/L) . The Tl results for 1GW-D3 and GW-I13 are estimated (J)due to low bias and contamination. All of the remaining Tl resultsare estimated (UJ) due to a possible elevated detection limit.

The laboratory analyzed the preparation blank for As, Pb, Se and Tltwice. The second preparation blank was run after the last CCV andCCB which is not valid. The laboratory reported the preparationblank results for As, Pb, Se and Tl from the second analysis. Infact, the first analysis results for the preparation blank should

Reviewed by: Lockheed/ESATDate: /c-3f-7 _

ESAT-5-041.1

be reported: the As result should be -6.6 ug/L(B), the Pb resultshould be -7.5 ug/L(B) and the Se result should be -5.3 ug/L(B).The laboratory reported all ICB and CCBs for Pb and Se below theIDL and flagged with (U). The corrected values for Pb should be -5.7 ug/L(B) for ICB, -4.0 ug/L(B) for CCB1, -5.3 ug/L(B) for CCB2,-6.4 ug/L(B) for CCB3 and -5.9 ug/L(B) for CCB4. The correct valuefor Se should be -5.4 ug/L(B). The CCB1 contains As (-5.0 ug/L)and the CCB4 contains As (-5.5 ug/L). All preparation blankresults for Se and Pb and some CCB results are less than thenegative CRDL. The laboratory did not restandardize and rerun thesamples. The following samples are associated with a negativeblank concentration whose absolute value is greater than the IDL:the As results for 1GW-D3, GW-I13, GW-I21, GW-I15, GW-I15D and GW-S15, the Pb results for 1GW-S4, GW-I15, GW-I27, GW-I15D and GW-S15and the Se result for 1GW-D3 are greater than the IDL and lessthan five times the blank concentration and are estimated (J). Tlresults for 1GW-D3, GW-I27 and GW-I13 are affected by the negativeblank as stated above. Some non-detect concentration reading ofthe samples are sufficiently high that the negative blank readingmay cause the IDL: the As result for GW-I27, the Pb results for1GW-D3, GW-I21, GW-S17, GW-S17D, 1EQ-04, GW-I26 and 1EQ-05, the Seresults for GW-D07, GW-D11, GW-S17D, 1GW-S04, l-EQ-04, GW-I11, GW-D28, GW-I26, 1EQ-05, GW-I27, GW-I13 and the Tl results for 1GW-S4,GW-S17, GW-S17D, GW-I11, GW-I25, GW-I25D, GW-I15, GW-I15D areestimated (UJ).

OTHER QUALIFIERS: The laboratory did not have the Form II (part 1)for the run dated 3/31/97 for Hg. There is a discrepancy betweenthe Hg raw data and Form 14 (Analysis Run Log) dated 3/31/97 whichwas not completed by the laboratory. All Hg results areacceptable.

Samples 1EQ-04 and 1EQ-05 are field blanks and contain Fe (34.5ug/L and 48.3 ug/L) and Zn (7.3 ug/L). The Fe result for GW-D07and the Zn results for 1GW-D3, GW-D07, GW-D11, GW-I21 and GW-S17are affected by contamination but remain qualified as statedabove.

Reviewed by: r^____, r^^__________ Lockheed/ESATDate: /f-J/-?7 ! j

ESAT-5-041.1

SDG#: 1097ED

The package for this SDG contains 17 filtered water samples and 3filtered field duplicates analyzed for total metals. The samplesare 1EQ-04, 1EQ-05, 1GW-D3, 1GW-I7, 1GW-S4, GW-D07, GW-D11, GW-D28,GW-I11, GW-I13, GW-I15, GW-I21, GW-I25, GW-I26, GW-I27, GW-S15, GW-S17. The duplicates are GW-I15D, GW-I25D and GW-S17D.


ICP ANALYSES: The digestion duplicate (GW-I27D) audit for Zn (75.4%RPD) is out of control. All Zn results are estimated (J) due topoor precision.

The digestion duplicate (GW-I27D) audits for Ag (200.0% RPD), AS(200.0% RPD), Cr (200.0% RPD), K (23.2% RPD), Mn (26.7% RPD), Sb(200.0% RPD) and Tl (200.0% RPD) were not flagged by the laboratorybecause the duplicate differences did not exceed the technicalcriterion ( + /- CRDL) for water samples. All As, Cr and Tl resultsare acceptable. Ag, Mn, Sb and K results are not qualified on thisbasis and are qualified below.

The field duplicate (GW-S17D) audits for Pb (200.0% RPD), Sb (37.4%RPD) and Zn (55.7% RPD); the field duplicate (GW-I15D) audits forAs (64.4% RPD), Al (200.0% RPD) and Sb (200.0% RPD); and the fieldduplicate (GW-I25D) audits for Pb (200.0% RPD), Sb (200.0% RPD) andSe (200.0% RPD) were not flagged by the laboratory because theduplicate difference did not exceed the technical criterion (+/-CRDL) for water samples. All Al and As are acceptable. Zn resultsare not qualified on this basis and remain qualified as statedabove. Sb and Pb results are not qualified on this basis and arequalified below.

The field duplicate (GW-I25D) audits for Cu (difference > CRDL) andZn (difference > CRDL) are out of control. All Cu results areestimated (J) due to poor precision. Zn results are affected bypoor precision but remain qualified as stated above.

& L-iReviewed by: P - T _______ Lockheed/ESATDate: /£-•*>!•? 7 J_________

ESAT-5-041.1

The field duplicate (GW-I15D) audit for Pb (200.0% RPD) was flaggedby the laboratory; however, the duplicate difference did not exceedthe technical criterion (+/- CRDL) for water samples. Pb resultsare not qualified on this basis and are qualified below.

The ICSAB1 results for Ba and Mg were missing from the raw data dueto the copy error and could not be verified. However, noqualification was made on this basis.


The recovery of CCV3 for K (88.3%) is out of control. The ICBcontains K (1430.3 ug/L). The K results for 1EQ-04 and 1EQ-05 areaffected by a possible elevated detection limit. The K results forGW-I13 and GW-S17 are affected by low bias. All of the remainingK results are affected by low bias and contamination. However, allK results remain qualified as stated above.

The ICB contains Na (382.9 ug/L) and CCB contains Sb (6.5 ug/L).The Na results for 1EQ-04 and 1EQ-05 and the Sb results for 1EQ-04,1GW-D3, 1GW-I7, 1GW-S4, GW-D11, GW-D28, GW-I11, GW-I21, GW-S15 andGW-S17 are estimated (J) due to contamination.

The CCB1 results for Se and Tl were incorrectly reported on FormIII. The correct values for CCB1 should be 5.4 ug/L(B) and -2.8ug/L{B), respectively. The Se results for 1GW-D3, 1GW-S4, GW-D11,GW-I11 and GW-I15 and the Tl results for 1GW-D03, GW-D07, GW-I13are estimated (J) due to contamination. The Tl absolute value forGW-Sj.7 is greater than the CRDL and is estimated (UJ) due to apossible elevated detection limit.

The preparation blank was found to contain As (-4.98 ug/L) and theCCBs contain K (-432.3 ug/L), Mn (-4.3 ug/L) and Ni (-31.3 ug/L).The laboratory incorrectly reported the Mn result for 1EQ-04 and Ni

Reviewed by: 1=^—— ^ j^-~_______ Lockheed/ESATDate: /t-:5f-?7

ESAT-5-041.1

result for GW-S17 on Form I. The correct value for Mn should be3.6 ug/L(B) and the correct value for Ni should be 27.6 ug/L(B).The following samples are associated with the negative blankconcentration whose absolute value is greater than the IDL: The Asresults for 1GW-D3; 1GW-S4, GW-I13, GW-I15, GW-I15D and GW-S15; theMn results for GW-D11, 1EQ-04 and 1EQ-05 and the Ni result for GW-D28 are greater than five times the blank concentration and areestimated (J) due to contamination. The K results for 1GW-D3, GW-D28, GW-D07, GW-I11, GW-I15, GW-I1SD, GW-I21, GW-I25 and GW-I26 areaffected by contamination but remain qualified as stated above.Some non-detect concentration reading of the samples aresufficiently high that the negative blank reading may cause the IDLto be elevated: the As results for GW-I21, GW-S15, 1GW-I7, GW-D28,GW-I25, GW-I25D and GW-I27 are estimated (UJ).

OTHER QUALIFIERS: The laboratory did not have the Form II (part 1)for the run dated 3/31/97 for Hg. There is a discrepancy betweenthe Hg raw data and Form 14 (Analysis Run Log) dated 3/31/97 whichwas not completed by the laboratory. All Hg results areacceptable.

Samples 1EQ-04 and 1EQ-05 are field blanks and contain Fe (29.9ug/L and 31.8 ug/L), Mn (14.9 ug/L), Pb (2.6 ug/L), Sb (3.6 ug/L)and Zn (5.8 ug/L). The Fe results for GW-D07 and GW-I21; the Mnresults for 1GW-I7 and GW-D11; the Pb results for GW-D11, GW-I11;the Sb results for 1GW-D3, 1GW-I7; 1GW-S4, GW-D11, GW-D28, GW-I11,GW-I21, GW-S15 and GW-S17 and the Zn results for 1GW-S4, GW-D28,GW-I15, GW-I21, GW-S15 and GW-S17 are estimated (J) due tocontamination.

SDG#: 1053ET

The package for this SDG contains 18 unfiltered water samples and2 unfiltered field duplicates analyzed for total metals. Thesamples are 1EQ-02, 1EQ-03, 1GW-D2, 1GW-I3, 1GW-S6, GW-D10, GW-D17,GW-D20, GW-I10, GW-I16, GW-I20, GW-I22, GW-I24, GW-S19, GW-S20, GW-

& L^LReviewed by: fc- — ^h,^-_______ Lockheed/ESATDate: fC-*l-?7 'J

ESAT-5-041.1

S24, GW-S25 and GW-S27. The duplicates are GW-D2D and GW-I20D.


ICP ANALYSES: The digestion duplicate (1GW-I3D) audits for Ca(35.2% RPD), Pb {difference > CRDL) and Zn (38.9% RPD) are out ofcontrol. All Ca, Pb and Zn are estimated C J) due to poorprecision.

LCS concentration readings for Ca, Mg, K and Na were unusually lowor less than the IDL. Control limits for these analytes were notlisted on Form VII. The reviewer must conclude that the LCS werenot spiked for these analytes. Since no LCS data are available,all Mg, K and Na data are estimated (J) due to unknown bias. Caresults are affected by unknown bias but remain qualified as statedabove.

The digestion duplicate (1GW-I3D) audits for Al (39.6% RPD), Ba(34.0% RPD), Co (34.5% RPD), Be (42.8% RPD), Cu (30.2% RPD), Ni(27.4% RPD), Sb (200.0% RPD) and V (40.7% RPD) were not flagged bythe laboratory because the duplicate differences did not exceed thetechnical criterion (+/- CRDL) for water samples. All Al, Ba, Cu,Ni and V results are acceptable. Co, Be and Sb results are notqualified on this basis and are qualified below.

The field duplicate (GW-I20D) audit for Zn (difference > CRDL) isout of control. All Zn results are affected by poor precision butremain qualified as stated above.

The field duplicate (GW-I20D) audits for Al (200.0% RPD), Be(200.0% RPD), Co (200.0% RPD), Cr (200.0% RPD), Cu (33.2% RPD), Ni(200.0% RPD), Se (200.0% RPD), Tl (200.0% RPD) and V (200.0% RPD)were not flagged by the laboratory because the duplicatedifferences did not exceed the technical criterion (+/- CRDL) forwater samples. All Al, Cu, Ni, Se and V results are acceptable.Be, Cr, Co and Tl results are not qualified on this basis and arequalified below.

Reviewed by: *—-' —<-*-_______ Lockheed/ESATDate: /*-*-97 !j

ESAT-5-041.1

The field duplicate (1GW-D2D) audits for Cu (difference > CRDL) andPb (difference > CRDL) are out of control . All Cu results areestimated (J) due to poor precision. Pb results are affected bypoor precision but remain qualified as stated above.

The field duplicate (1GW-D2D) audits for As (200.0% RPD) , Co (28.4%RPD) , Cr (69.6% RPD), K (26.3% RPD), Ni (25.4% RPD), Tl (200.0%RPD) and Zn (28.4% RPD) were not flagged by the laboratory becausethe duplicate differences did not exceed the technical criterion(+/- CRDL) for water samples. As, Cr, K, Ni, Co and Tl results arenot qualified on this basis and are qualified below. All Znresults remain qualified as stated above.

The field duplicate (1GW-D2D) audit for Se (200.0% RPD) wasflagged by the laboratory; however, the duplicate difference didnot exceed the technical criterion (+/- CRDL) for water samples.Se results are not qualified on this basis and are qualified below.

The matrix spike recovery for Mn (127 . 1%) and the ICP serialdilution audit (11 .4% difference) are out of control . All Mnresults are estimated (J) due to high bias and interference.

The matrix spike recovery for Fe (1694.8%) was not flagged by thelaboratory because the sample concentration is greater than fourtimes the spike added. All Fe results are acceptable .

The CCBs were found to contain Cr (3.3 ug/L) , Sb (11.1 ug/L) , Se(4.2 ug/L), Be (1.9 ug/L), Co (18.8 ug/L), Tl (5.0 ug/L), Cd (1.8ug/L) , Pb (3.4 ug/L) and Ag (8.5 ug/L) . The sample concentrationgreater than the IDLs and less than five times the blank areestimated ( J) due to contamination. Some negative results werefound in some CCBs and preparation blank whose absolute values aregreater than the instrument detection limit (IDL) : As (-5.3ug/L), Mn (-4 . 558 ug/L) , Pb (-2. 7 ug/L), Tl (-2. 9 ug/L), Al (-153.8ug/L), Co (-25.5 ug/L), Be (-3.1 ug/L), Cu (-21.2 ug/L), K (-381.8ug/L), Ni (-39.1 ug/L), V (-40.9 ug/L) and Zn (-5.2 ug/L). Thesample concentrations greater than the IDL and less than five timesthe blank concentration are qualified (J) . The following resultsare affected by contamination: the As results for 1GW-D2, GW-S20

fo •P — "~• /Reviewed by: P^— "~ ^fr^~ ________ Lockheed/ESATDate: /c--3«-?7 ./

ESAT-5-041. 1

and GW-S24; all Cr results except GW-D10; all Al results except GW-D20 and GW-S27; the Sb results for 1EQ-02, 1GW-I3, 1GW-S6, GW-D10,GW-D20, GW-I10, GW-I24, GW-S19, GW-S20; all Ni results except GW-S20 and GW-D20; all Cu results except GW-D20; the V results for1EQ-02, 1EQ-031GW-D2, 1GW-I3, 1GW-S6, GW-D17, GW-I10, GW-I16, GW-120, GW-I22, GW-I24, GW-S19, GW-S24 and GW-S27; the Se results for1EQ-02, 1GW-D2 and GW-I20; the Mn result for 1EQ-02 and 1EQ-03; thePb results for 1GW-D2, 1GW-I3, GW-D10, GW-D17, GW-D20, GW-I20, GW-S19, GW-S20, GW-S24, GW-S25; the Cd results for 1GW-S6, GW-D10,GW-D20, GW-I22 and GW-I24; all Co results except GW-D10, GW-D20,GW-S20 and GW-S25; the Tl results for 1EQ-02, 1GW-D2, GW-D10, GW-D20, GW-I16, GW-I20 and GW-S20; all Be results except GW-D10, GW-D20, GW-S20 and GW-S25 and the Ag result for GW-D10. Some Non-detect concentration readings are sufficiently high that thenegative blank reading may have cause the IDL to be elevated. Thenon-detects listed are qualified (UJ): the Tl results for GW-S19,GW-I22, GW-I10, GW-S24, GW-S25, GW-S27, 1GW-I3 and 1GW-S6; the Asresults for GW-D20, GW-I20, IEQ-02. The K results for 1EQ-02, 1EQ-03, GW-D17, GW-D20, GW-I20, GW-I22, GW-S19 and GW-S20 and all Znresults which is above the IDL are affected by contamination butremain qualified as stated.

OTHER QUALIFIERS: All Hg results are acceptable.

SDG#: 1053ED

The package for this SDG contains 18 filtered water samples and 2filtered field duplicates analyzed for total metals. The samplesare 1EQ-02, 1EQ-03, 1GW-D2, 1GW-I3, 1GW-S6, GW-D10, GW-D17, GW-D20,GW-I10, GW-I16, GW-I20, GW-I22, GW-I24, GW-S19, GW-S20, GW-S24, GW-S25 and GW-S27. The duplicates are GW-D2D and GW-I20D.


Reviewed by: r^—— i y-v- -._____ Lockheed/ESATDate: /r -•*'-*? 7 \J_________

ESAT-5-041.1

10

ICP ANALYSES: The digestion duplicate (1GW-I3D) audits for Ag(200.0% RPD), Cr (36.8% RPD), Pb (31.4% RPD), Sb (200.0% RPD), Se(20.8% RPD) and Tl (200.0% RPD) were not flagged by the laboratorybecause the duplicate differences did not exceed the technicalcriterion ( + /- CRDL) for water samples. All Al, Cr, Pb, Sb, Se andTl results are acceptable.


The field duplicate (GW-I20D) audit for Fe (60.4% RPD) is out ofcontrol. All Fe results are estimated (J) due to poor precision.

The field duplicate (GW-I20D) audits for As(33.2% RPD), Cu (200.0%RPD), Cr (44.5% RPD), Cu (200.0% RPD), Pb (60.9% RPD), Sb (200.0%RPD) and Zn (30.4% RPD) were not flagged by the laboratory becausethe duplicate differences did not exceed the technical criterion(+/- CRDL) for water samples. All As, Cu, Cr, Cu, Pb, Sb and Znresults are acceptable.

The field duplicate (1GW-D2D) audit for Fe (difference > CRDL) isout of control. All Fe results are affected by poor precision butremain qualified as stated above.

The field duplicate (1GW-D2D) audits for As (200.0% RPD), Mg (20.0%RPD), Mn (200.0% RPD), Sb (200.0% RPD) and Se (24.0% RPD) were notflagged by the laboratory because the duplicate differences did notexceed the technical criterion (+/- CRDL) for water samples. As,Mn, Sb and Se are acceptable. Mg results are not qualified on thisbasis and remain qualified as stated above.

The field duplicate (1GW-D2D) audit for Pb (200.0% RPD) was flaggedby the laboratory; however, the duplicate difference did not exceedthe technical criterion (+/- CRDL) for water samples. Pb resultsare not qualified on this basis and are qualified below.

,Reviewed by: 1^*——^ v^v—______ Lockheed/ESATDate:

ESAT-5-041.1

11

The CCBs were found to contain Ag (4.0 ug/L), K (312.1 ug/L), Pb(2.7 ug/L}, Sb (11.5 ug/L), Tl (6.1 ug/L), Se (8.5 ug/L) and Cr(1.3 ug/L). All Cr results except IEQ-03, GW-D10 and GW-S24; theAg results for 1EQ-02, IGW-I3, GW-D10, GW-D20 and GW-S27; all Pbresults except 1GW-D2; the Sb results for 1EQ-02, 1GW-S6, GW-D10,GW-D20, GW-I10, GW-I16, GW-I22, GW-I24, GW-S19, GW-S20, and GW-S25;the Tl results for 1EQ-02, IEQ-03, 1GW-D2, GW-D10, GW-D17, GW-D20,GW-I16 and GW-I22 and all Se results except 1EQ-02, 1GW-S6, GW-D17,GW-I10 and GW-I20 are estimated (J) due to contamination. The Kresults for 1EQ-02, GW-S19 and GW-S20 are affected by contaminationbut remain qualified as stated above.

Some negative results were found in some CCBs whose absolute valuesare greater than the instrument detection limit (IDL): As(-2.9ug/L) and Fe (-22.6 ug/L). The sample concentrations greater thanthe IDL and less than five times the blank concentration areaffected but remain qualified as stated above: IEQ-03, 1GW-D2, GW-D10, GW-I10, GW-S25 and GW-S27 for Fe and 1GW-D2, GW-D17, GW-I20,GW-S20 and GW-S24 for As.

OTHER QUALIFIERS: All Hg results are acceptable

SDG#: 0981ET

The package for this SDG contains 19 unfiltered water samples and1 unfiltered field duplicate analyzed for total metals. The samplesare 1GW-I1, 1GW-S3, 1GW-S5, 1GW-S7, 2EQ-01, GW-12I, GW-D09, GW-D12,GW-D23, GW-I09, GW-I23, GW-S01, GW-S09, GW-S10, GW-S11, GW-S18, GW-S21, GW-S23 and GW-S26. The duplicate is GW-S23D.


ICP ANALYSES: The digestion duplicate (1GW-I1D) audit for Fe(47.4% RPD) and the ICP serial dilution (GW-12I) audit for Fe(12.7% difference) are out of control. All Fe results are

Reviewed by: f^-—*— r________ Lockheed/ESATDate: /c-J»-?7 J

ESAT-5-041.1

12

estimated (J) due to poor precision and interference.


The digestion duplicate (1GW-I1D) audits for Ag (difference >CRDL), Cr (difference > CRDL), Ni {difference > CRDL) and Pb(difference > CRDL) are out of control. All Ag, Cr, Ni and Pb areestimated (J) due to poor precision. The laboratory did not flagAg, Cr and Pb results on Forms I.

The digestion duplicate (1GW-I1D) audits for As (51.6% RPD) , Cd(200.0% RPD) and Sb (55.0% RPD) were not flagged by the laboratorybecause the duplicate differences did not exceed the technicalcriterion ( +/- CRDL} for water samples. All As and Cd areacceptable. Sb results are not qualified on this basis and arequalified below.

The digestion duplicate (1GW-I1D) audit for Mn (21.1% RPD) and theICP serial dilution (GW-12I) audit for Mn (12.9% difference) is outof control. All Mn results are estimated (J) due to poor precisionand interference.

The field duplicate (GW-S23D) audit for Pb (21.9% RPD} is out ofcontrol. All Pb results are estimated (J} due to poor precision.

The field duplicate (1GW-I23D) audits for As (71.8% RPD) and Cr(42.5% RPD) were not flagged by the laboratory because theduplicate differences did not exceed the technical criterion (+/-CRDL) for water samples. All As results are acceptable. All Crresults are not qualified on this basis but remain qualified asstated above.

The matrix spike recovery for Fe (2391.7%) was not flagged by thelaboratory because the sample concentration is greater than fourtimes the spike added. Fe results are not qualified on this basis

Reviewed by: l~^—*~- ^^-p-—>_____ Lockheed/ESATDate : ___________

ESAT-5-041.1

13

and remain qualified as stated above.

The ICP serial dilution (GW-12I) audits for Ca (11.0% difference),Na {23,9% difference) and Zn (20.8% difference) and the ICP serialdilution (GW-S18) audit for Zn (10.4% difference) are out ofcontrol. All Zn results are estimated (J) due to interference.All Ca dn Na results are affected by interference but remainqualified as stated above.

The CCBs were found to contain Ag (5.0 ug/L), Sb (8.6 ug/L) and Cr(0.8 ug/L). The Cr results for 1GW-S7, 2EQ-01, GW-D09, GW-S10, GW-Sll, GW-S21 and GW-S23 and the Ag results for 2EQ-01, GW-12I, GW-D12, GW-I09, GW-S01, GW-S10, GW-S18 AND GW-S23 are affected bycontamination but remain qualified as stated above. All Sb resultsexcept 2EQ-01, GW-D12, GW-S09 and GW-S21 are estimated (J) due tocontamination. Some negative results were found in some CCBs andpreparation blank whose absolute values are greater than theinstrument detection limit (IDL): Mn (-6.317 ug/L), Cu (-12.647ug/L), Pb (-2.8 ug/L) and Se (-4.6 ug/L). The sample concentrationgreater than the IDL and less than five times the blankconcentration are qualified (J): the Cu results for 1GW-S3, 1GW-S5,1GW-S7, GW-D23, GW-S01, GW-S09, GW-S10, GW-S11 and GW-S26; the Mnresult for 2EQ-01, GW-D09, GW-I09 and GW-I23; the Pb results for1GW-I1, 1GW-S3, 1GW-S5, 1GW-S7, 2EQ-01, GW-D09, GW-D12, GW-D23, GW-109, GW-I23, GW-S09, GW-S10 and GW-S21; and the Se result for 2EQ-01. Some Non-detect concentration readings are sufficiently highthat the negative blank readings may have caused the IDL to beelevated. The non-detects listed are qualified (UJ) : the Seresults for GW-D12, GW-I23, GW-S21, GW-S09, GW-S05 and GW-S18.

OTHER QUALIFIERS: All Hg results are acceptable

SDG#: 0981ED

The package for this SDG contains 19 filtered water samples and 1filtered field duplicate analyzed for total metals. The samples are

Reviewed by: '-—"- /] '______ Lockheed/ESATDate : _________________ _..____

ESAT-5-041.1

14

1GW-I1, 1GW-S3, 1GW-S5, 1GW-S7, 2EQ-01, GW-12I, GW-D09, GW-D12, GW-D23, GW-I09, GW-I23, GW-S01, GW-S09, GW-S10, GW-S11, GW-S18, GW-S21, GW-S23 and GW-S26. The duplicate is GW-S23D.


ICP ANALYSES: The digestion duplicate (1GW-I1D) audits for Ag(200.0% RPD) , As (200.0% RPD) , Cr (102.2% RPD) , Sb (200.0% RPD) andZn (118.9% RPD) were not flagged by the laboratory because theduplicate differences did not exceed the technical criterion (+/-CRDL) for water samples. All As, Ag, Cr and Sb results areacceptable. Zn results are not qualified on this basis and arequalified below.

The digestion duplicate (1GW-I1D) audit for Pb (200.0% RPD) wasflagged by the laboratory; however, the duplicate difference didnot exceed the technical criterion (+/- CRDL) for water samples.All Pb results are acceptable.


The ICP serial dilution (GW-12I) audit for Na (12.% difference) isout of control. All Na results are affected by interference butremain qualified as stated above. The laboratory only flagged (E)for Na results for 1GW-I1, 2EQ-01, GW-12I,GW-D09, GW-D23, GW-S11,and GW-S23 on Forms I.

The laboratory incorrectly flagged (N) for Al results on Form I:1GW-I1, 2EQ-01, GW-12I, GW-D09, GW-D23, GW-S11 and GW S23.

The field duplicate (GW-S23D) audit for Zn (difference > CRDL) isout of control. All Zn results are estimated (J) due to poorprecision. The laboratory did not flagged (*) for Zn results onForms I: 1GW-S3, 1GW-S5, 1GW-S7, GW-D12, GW-I09, GW-I23, GW-S01,

Reviewed by: \-=^~*— r"' '_____ Lockheed/ESATDate: t+'-U^J :./

ESAT-5-041.1

IB

GW-S09, GW-S10, GW-S18, GW-S21 and GW-S36.

The field duplicate (1GW-S23D) audits for Ag (22.7% RPD), Al(200.0% RPD), Cr (77.7% RPD}, Cu (30.4% RPD), Ni (29.4% RPD), Sb(43.4% RPD) and V (200.0% RPD) were not flagged by the laboratorybecause the duplicate differences did not exceed the technicalcriterion (+/- CRDL) for water samples. All Cr and Ni results areacceptable. Ag, Al, Cu, Sb and V results are not qualified onthis basis and are qualified below.

The CCBs were found to contain Ag (2.3 ug/L) , Sb (8.1 ug/L) , Al(109.9 ug/L), Be (2.2 ug/L), Cu (15.2 ug/L), K (275.3 ug/L), Ni(39.9 ug/L), V (27.6 ug/L) and Co (24.0 ug/L). The Ag results for1GW-I1, 2EQ-01, GW-12I, GW-D12, GW-D23, GW-S10, GW-S18 and GW-S23;the Sb results for 1GW-I1, 1GW-S5, 1GW-S7, GW-12I, GW-D09, GW-D12,GW-D23, GW-S01, GW-S10, GW-S11, GW-S18, GW-S23 and GW-S26; the Alresults for 2EQ-01, GW-D09, GW-D23, GW-I09, GW-S09, GW-S10, GW-S11,GW-S21 and GW-S23; the Cu results for 2EQ-01, GW-12I, GW-D09, GW-D23, GW-I09, GW-I23, GW-S09, GW-S10, GW-S11, GW-S21 and GW-S23;the K results for 2EQ-01, GW-S18 and GW-S10; the Ni results for2EQ-01, GW-12I, GW-D09, GW-D23, GW-I09, GW-S09, GW-S10, GW-S11, GW-S21 and GW-S23; the Be results for 2EQ-01, GW-12I, GW-D09, GW-D23,GW-I09, GW-S09, GW-S10, GW-S11 and GW-S21; the Co results for 2EQ-01, GW-12I, GW-D09, GW-D23, GW-I09, GW-I23, GW-S09, GW-S10, GW-S11,GW-S21 and GW-S23 and the V results for 2EQ-01, GW-12I, GW-D09, GW-D23, GW-I09, GW-S09, GW-S10, GW-S11, GW-S21 and GW-S23 areestimated (J) due to contamination. Some negative results werefound in some CCBs whose absolute values are greater than theinstrument detection limit (IDL): Al (-118.5 ug/L), Be (-2.8ug/L), Cu (-17.5 ug/L), K (-323.2 ug/L), Mn (-3.1 ug/L), Ni (-37.7ug/L) and V (-32.8 ug/L) . The sample concentration greater than theIDL and less than five times the blank concentration are affectedbut remain qualified as stated above: the Al results for 2EQ-01,GW-D09, GW-D23, GW-I09, GW-S09, GW-S10, GW-S11, GW-S21 and GW-S23;the Cu results for 2EQ-01, GW-12I, GW-D09, GW-D23, GW-I09, GW-I23,GW-S09, GW-S10, GW-S11, GW-S21 and GW-S23; the K results for 2EQ-01, GW-S18 and GW-S10; the Ni results for 2EQ-01, GW-12I, GW-D09,GW-D23, GW-I09, GW-S09, GW-S10, GW-S11, GW-S21 and GW-S23; the Beresults for 2EQ-01, GW-12I, GW-D09, GW-D23, GW-I09, GW-S09, GW-S10,

fo ' L U-Reviewed by: 'P"—'^ '____ y"*_______ Lockheed/ESATDate: /c-31-37 J

ESAT-5-041.1

16

GW-S11 and GW-S21 and the V results for 2EQ-01, GW-12I, GW-D09, GW-D23, GW-I09, GW-S09, GW-S10, GW-S11, GW-S21 and GW-S23 . The Mnresults for GW-I23, GW-I09, 2EQ-01 and GW-S18 are estimated (J) .Some Non-detect concentration reading are sufficiently high thatthe negative blank reading may have cause the IDL to be elevated.The non-detects listed are qualified (UJ): the Be results for GW-S23, GW-I23, 1GW-S3, 1GW-S7, GW-S18, GW-S26 and GW-S01 and the Niresults for GW-I23, GW-D12 and GW-S01.

OTHER QUALIFIERS: All Hg results are acceptable.

Reviewed by: '____ .j_______ Lockheed/ESATDate: ______________________

ESAT-5-041.1

N Z T E r STATES ESVIRONXiNTAl PROTECTION AGENCYREGION V

ESD Central Recicnal LaboratoryData Tracking Fcrr. for Contract S ar.pl es

Data Set Nc . / _____________ CEr.CLIS No.

Case K=- *P R r S i re Nar.e Loca t ion:

Ccr . t rac tcr cr I?.-. Lab: _____________ Data User:

No. cf g>T.rl££: /g>y Date Sar.ples cr Data F.sceived:,

r=ve Cr.Eir.-cf-C-stcdy records beer, received? YES ___ ND ___vlv. *^-^^r- rercris'cr pacxi" lists beer, received? VES ___ NC __Zf r.;V Ire* traffic report cr packing list rubbers vritter. cr. tr.e

YES NC. . ____If'r.c, vr.icr. traffic report cr pacXir.o list numbers ere r.i£ = ir.c?

.Date:.

Date:

Reviewer Sicnature:

Tctc" tir.e Ersr.t cr, review: Date review cor.rleted:+*f*Ccried by: __________________ _ _______ Date:

Kailed tc user by: ___________________ Date:

rlrE = = fill ir. the bl=r.V.s below ar.d return this forr. .tc:Sylvia Griffin, Data Krr.t. Coordinator, Region V, 5SCRI.

Cct= received by: ____________________ Date:

D=ta review received by: ______________ Date:

ycur uses.

received by Data K="t. Coordinetor for Files Date:.

Region 5 Transmittal Form


DATE:

SUBJECT:

FROM;

Review of Region V CLP DataReceived for Review on

Stephen L. Ostrodka, Chief (HSRL-5J)Superfund Technical Support Section

TO: Data User:

///C//J7

He have reviewed the data for the following case:

SITE NAME: ffffi Sg jfit/ftyt TfclA L

CASE NUMBER: _____________

Number' and Type of Samples:

Sample Numbers: ^>J2J2—(J j

Laboratory: f\flj /• €.'€.fa L, •£• cl

SDG NUMBER:

.L

Hrs . for Review:


cc: Regional TPOCecilia LuckettSM-5J

&

NARRATIVEPage 1 of 22

Laboratory: Antech Ltd. Case: 0981Site: Exce s sIndustrial Landfill(OH)SDG: 0981

Below is a summary of the out-of-control audits and possibleeffects on the data for this Case/SDG:

Eighty-one (81) water samples, numbered GW-12I, BE-01, GW-D12,GW-S23, GW-S23-D, GW-D23, GW-I23, GW-S10, EQ-01, GW-S11, GW-S21,BT-03, GW-I09, GW-S09, GW-D09, GW-S26, BT-04, GW-S5, GW-S01, GW-S3,GW-S7, BT-05, GW-S18, GW-I1, EQ-02, BT-06, GW-D3, GW-D09, GW-D11,GW-I21, BT-13, GW-S4, GW-S17-D, GW-S15, BT-12, GW-I3, GW-I7, EQ-04,ON-111, GW-D28, BT-11, GW-I26, GW-I27, EQ-05, GW-I27, BT-14,GW-I25, GW-I25-D, GW-I13, GW-I15, GW-I15-D, GW-D01, GW-D27, GW-I18,BT-15, GW-I14, GW-S14, EQ-06, BT-16, GW-D20, GW-S20, GW-I20,GW-S20-D, BT-07, GW-S17, GW-I22, GW-I24, EQ-03, GW-I10, BT-08,GW-S24, GW-S25, GW-S27, SG-S6, GW-I16, GW-D17, GW-D2-D, GW-D2,GW-D10, BT-10 and GW-I3 were collected on Mar 12, 13, 14, 17, 18,19 and 20, 1997. The lab received the samples on March 13, 14,15, 18 and 21, 1997 in good condition. All samples were analyzedfor the full list of organic analytes except samples BT-03, BT-04,BE-01, BT-05, BT-06, BT-13, BT-12, BT-11, BT-14, BT-08, BT-15,BT-16, BT-07, and BT-10 which are Trip Blanks and were onlyanalyzed for VOAs. All samples were analyzed using SW846 analysismethods.

The VGA analyses were performed within the technical holdingtime of 14 days after sample collection, therefore, the analysisresults are acceptable. All pesticide and semivolatile organiccompound sample extractions, with the exceptions noted below, wereperformed within seven (7) days of sample collection and allextract analyses were performed within forty (40) days after sampleextraction, therefore, the analysis results are acceptable

For the SVOA fraction, sample GW-D10 was extracted beyond therequired holding time, therefore, all positive results areconsidered estimated and are qualified "J" for sample GW-D10; non-detects are qualified "UJ".

For the Pest/PCB fraction, samples GW-D20, GW-S20, GW-I20, GW-S17, GW-I22, GW-I24, EQO3, GW-I10, GW-S24, and GW-S25 wereextracted outside the required holding time, therefore, allpositive results for these samples are considered estimated and arequalified "J" whereas non-detects are qualified "UJ".

The field personnel designated samples GW-I3, GW-I27 andGW-I1 to be used for the Matrix Spikes/Matrix Spike Duplicates.

Samples EQ-01, EQ-02, EQ-03, EQ-04, EQ-05 and EQ-06 weredesignated as field blanks by the QAPP.

Reviewed by: T. Sedlacek Lockheed Martin/ESATDate: November 4, 1997



The following samples are duplicate pairs: GW-S23 and GW-S23D,GW-I25 and GW-I25D, GW-I15 and GW-I15D, GW-S20 and GW-S20D and GW-D2 and GW-D2D.

The reviewer's observations and comments for this data casefollow.




1. HOLDING TIME

Eighty-one (81) water samples, numbered GW-12I, BE-01, GW-D12,GW-S23, GW-S23-D, GW-D23, GW-I23, GW-S10, EQ-01, GW-S11, GW-S21,BT-03, GW-I09, GW-S09, GW-D09, GW-S26, BT-04, GW-S5, GW-S01, GW-S3,GW-S7, BT-05, GW-S18, GW-I1, EQ-02, BT-06, GW-D3, GW-D09, GW-D11,GW-I21, BT-13, GW-S4, GW-S17-D, GW-S15, BT-12, GW-I3, GW-I7, EQ-04,GW-I11, GW-D28, BT-11, GW-I26, GW-I27, EQ-05, GW-I27, BT-14,GW-I25, GW-I25-D, GW-I13, GW-I15, GW-I15-D, GW-D01, GW-D27, GW-I18,BT-15, GW-I14, GW-S14, EQ-06, BT-16, GW-D20, GW-S20, GW-I20,GW-S20-D, BT-07, GW-S17, GW-I22, GW-I24, EQ-03, GW-I10, BT-08,GW-S24, GW-S25, GW-S27, SG-S6, GW-I16, GW-D17, GW-D2-D, GW-D2,GW-D10, BT-10 and GW-I3 were collected on Mar 12, 13; 14, 17, 18,19 and 20, 1997. The lab received the samples on March 13, 14,15, 18 and 21, 1997 in good condition. All samples were analyzedfor the full list of organic analytes except samples BT-03, BT-04,BE-01, BT-05, BT-06, BT-13, BT-12, BT-11, BT-14, BT-08, BT-15,BT-16, BT-07 and BT-10 which are Trip Blanks and were only analyzedfor VOAs. All samples were analyzed using SW846 analysis methods.

The VOA analyses were performed within the technical holdingtime of 14 days after sample collection, therefore, the analysisresults are acceptable. All pesticide and semivolatile organiccompound sample extractions, with the exceptions noted below, wereperformed within seven (7) days and all extract analyses wereperformed within forty (40) days after extraction, therefore, theanalysis results are acceptable.

For the SVOA fraction, sample GW-D10 was extracted beyond therequired holding time, therefore, all positive results areconsidered estimated and are qualified "J" whereas non-detects arequalified "UJ" for sample GW-D10.

For the Pest/PCB fraction, samples GW-D20, GW-S20, GW-I20, GW-S17, GW-I22, GW-I24, EQ-O3, GW-I10, GW-S24 and GW-S25 wereextracted outside the required holding time, therefore, allpositive results for these samples are considered estimated and arequalified "J" whereas non-detects are qualified "UJ".

2. GC/MS TUNING AND GC INSTRUMENT PERFORMANCE

All GC/MS tuning complied with mass list and ion abundancecriteria for BFB and all VOC samples were analyzed within thetwelve (12) hour periods for instrument performance checks.



Laboratory: Antech Ltd. Case: 0981Site: Exce ssIndustrial Landfill(OH)SDG: 0981

All GC/MS tuning complied with mass list and ion abundancecriteria for DFTPP and all SVOC samples were analyzed within thetwelve (12) hour periods for instrument performance checks.

GC resolution Check Mixtures met the 60% resolution criteriafor all compounds except Endosulfan I which had 0% resolution from4,4'-DDE on the RTXCLPPest column and had a 0.02 minute separationfrom alpha-Chloradane on the RTX-35 column. The analysis resultsfor Endosulfan I should be considered unusable and should bequalified "R" since compound identification and quantitiation isquestionable. Endrin and DDT degradation checks using the PEM Mixon RTX-35 and RTX CLPPest columns were <20% and the combined total<30%, therefore, the analysis results are acceptable.

The Florisil Cartridge Check for lot SH003-97B failed to meetQC criteria, therefore, the Pesticide analysis results areconsidered estimated. The recovery for alpha-BHC, gamma-BHC,Endosulfan I, 4,4'-DDT, Methoxychlor and TCMX was below 70% on bothcolumns. The analysis results for alpha-BHC, gamma-BHC, 4,4'-DDT,Methoxychlor and TCMX may be biased low and should be consideredestimated and positive results should be qualified "J" whereas non-detects should be qualified "UJ".

3. CALIBRATION

Initial and continuing calibrations of VGA, SVGA and Pest/PCBstandards were evaluated for the target compound list and outliersare recorded on the calibration outlier forms included as part ofthis narrative.

4. BLANKS

VGA: VBLK1, VBLK2, VBLK3, VBLK4, VBLK5 and VBLK6 are the low levelmatrix volatile method blanks. VBLK1 contained Methylene Chlorideat 1 //g/mL and Acetone at 5 //g/mL and no TICs. Methylene Chlorideand Acetone are common laboratory contaminants and their presencein any samples associated with VBLK1 is flagged as non-detected (U)when the sample result is less than ten (10) times the blankresult. VBLK2 contained Methylene Chloride at 1 g/mL and no TICs.Methylene Chloride is a common laboratory contaminant and it' spresence in any samples associated with VBLK2 is flagged as non-detected (U) when the sample result is less than ten (10) timesthe blank result. VBLK3 contained Methylene Chloride at 1 yug/mLand no TICs, Methylene Chloride is a common laboratory contaminantand it's presence in any samples associated with VBLK3 is flaggedas non-detected (U) when the sample result is less than ten (10)times the blank result. VBLK5 contained Methylene Chloride at 1



Laboratory: Antech Ltd. Case: 0981Site: ExcessIndustrial Landfill(OH)SDG: 0981

and no TICs. Methylene Chloride is a common laboratorycontaminant and it's presence in any samples associated with VBLK5is flagged as non-detected (U) when the sample result is less thanten (10) times the blank result. VBLK6 contained Methylene Chlorideat 1 //g/mL and Acetone at 5 //g/mL and no TICs. Methylene Chlorideand Acetone are common laboratory contaminants and their presencein any samples associated with VBLK6 is flagged as non-detected (U)when the sample result is less than ten (10) times the blankresult. The VGA method blank summary (FORM IV VGA) lists thesamples associated with each blank.

SVGA: SBLK01 3/18/97, SBLK01 3/20/97, SBLK01 3/24/97, SBLK013/25/97, SBLK02 3/19/97, SBLK02 3/21/97, SBLK02 3/25/97, SBLK034/2/97, SBLK03 4/4/97 are the low level matrix SVGA method blanks.SBLK01 3/18/97 contained no TCL ' s and one TIC. The presence of theTIC in the samples associated with SBLK01 3/18/97 is flagged non-detected (U) when the TIC concentration is less than five (5) timesthe blank result. SBLK01 3/20/97 contained Bis (2-ethylhexylphthalate) at 1 //g/L and no TICs. Bis (2-ethyl-hexyl-phthalate) is a common laboratory contaminant and it's presence inany samples associated with SBLK01 3/20/97 is flagged as non-detected (U) when the sample result is less than ten (10) times theblank result. SBLK01 3/24/97 contained Bis (2-ethylhexylphthalate)at 1 Mg/L and no TICs. Bis (2-ethylhexylphthalate) is a commonlaboratory contaminant and it's presence in any samples associatedwith SBLK01 3/24/97 is flagged as non-detected (U) when the sampleresult is less than ten (10) times the blank result. SBLK013/25/97 contained no TCL's and one TIC. The presence of the TIC inthe samples associated with SBLK01 3/25/97 is flagged non-detected(U) when the TIC concentration is less than five (5) times theblank result. SBLK02 3/19/97 contained no TCL's and two TICs. Thepresence of the TICs in the samples associated with SBLK02 3/19/97is flagged non-detected (U) when the TIC concentration is less thanfive (5) times the blank result. SBLK02 3/21/97 contained no TCL'sand one TIC. The presence of the TIC in the samples associatedwith SBLK02 3/21/97 is flagged non-detected (U) when the TICconcentration is less than five (5) times the blank result. SBLK023/25/97 contained no TCL's and one TIC. The presence of the TIC inthe samples associated with SBLK02 3/25/97 is flagged non-detected(U) when the TIC concentration is less than five (5) times theblank result. SBLK01 3/24/97 contained Bis (2-ethylhexylphthalate)at 21 Mg/L and no TICs. Bis (2-ethylhexylphthalate) is a commonlaboratory contaminant and it's presence in any samples associatedwith SBLK03 4/2/97 is flagged as non-detected (U) when the sampleresult is less than ten (10) times the blank result. SBLK03 4/4/97contained Butylbenzylphthalate at l//g/L, Bis (2-ethylhexylphthalate




at l//g/L and three TICs. Bis (2-ethylhexylphthalate) andButylbenzylphthalate are common laboratory contaminants and theirpresence in any samples associated with SBLK03 4/4/97 is flagged asnon-detected (U) when the sample result is less than ten (10) timesthe blank result. The presence of the TICs in the samplesassociated with SBLK03 is flagged non-detected (U) when the TICconcentration is less than five (5) times the blank result. TheSVGA method blank summaries (FORM IV SVGA) lists the samplesassociated with each blank. The end user is cautioned to ensurethat the proper blank for each summary sheet is used.

Pesticide\PCB:Method Blankl 3/18/97, Method Blankl 3/21/97, Method BlanklRE

5/02/97, Method Blank2 3/16/97, Method Blank2 3/22/97, MethodBlank2RE 5/02/97 and Method Blank3 3/20/97 are the low levelpesticide matrix method blanks. Method Blankl 3/18/97 contained nocontaminants. Method Blankl 3/21/97 contained Aldrin, Heptachlor,Dieldrin, Endrin and 4,4'-DDT at concentrations above the detectionlimit. The presence of the five TCLs in the samples associatedwith Method Blankl 3/21/97 is flagged non-detected (U) when the TCLconcentration is less than five times the blank result. MethodBlanklRE 5/02/97 contained Endrin Aldehyde at 0.06 //g/L. Thepresence of endrin aldehyde in the samples associated with MethodBlanklRE 5/02/97 is flagged non-detected (U) when the EndrinAldehyde concentration is less than five (5) times the blankresult. Method Blank2 3/16/97 contained 7 TCLs at levels above thedetection limit. The presence of the seven TCLs in the samplesassociated with Method Blank2 3/16/97 is flagged non-detected whenthe TCL concentration is less than five times the blank result.Method Blank2 3/22/97 contained Endrin Aldehyde at 0.09 //g/L. Thepresence of Endrin Aldehyde in the samples associated with MethodBlank2 3/22/97 is flagged non-detected (U) when the Endrin Aldehydeconcentration is less than five (5) times the blank result. MethodBlank2RE 5/2/97 contained Endrin Aldehyde at 0.08 //g/L. Thepresence of Endrin Aldehyde in the samples associated with MethodBlank2RE 5/2/97 is flagged non-detected (U) when the EndrinAldehyde concentration is less than five (5) times the blankresult. Method Blank3 3/20/97 contained Endrin Aldehyde at 0.21Mg/L and Endosulfan II at 0.03 //g/L. The presence of EndrinAldehyde and Endosulfan II in the samples associated with MethodBlank3 3/20/97 is flagged non-detected (U) when the concentrationof Endrin Aldehyde and Endosulfan II is less than five (5) timesthe blank result.The pesticide method blank summary (FORM IV PEST) lists the samplesassociated with each blank. The end user is cautioned to ensurethat the proper blank for each summary sheet is used.




5. SYSTEM MONITORING COMPOUND AND SURROGATE RECOVERY

VOA: The VOA system monitoring compounds were within QC requiredlimits for recovery and retention time except for:

SMC1(Toluened8) was out of QC limits low in samples GW-S17D,GW-D28, GW-I28, GW-I27 and GW-I27MS and was out of QC limitshigh for samples GW-I7 and GW-I11.SMC2(Bromofluorobenzene) was out of QC limits low for samplesGW-S4, GW-D28, GW-I26, GW-I27, GW-I27MSD, EQ05, BT-14, GW-I25D, GW-I13, GW-S14MSDL, GW-I14, GW-S24, GW-D17, GW-S24RE andGW-D17RE.SMC3 (1,2-DichloroethaneD4) was out of QC limits low forsamples GW-D3, GW-D07, GW-D11, GW-I21, BT-13, GW-S4, GW-S17,GW-S17D, GW-I27MS and GW-I14 and was out of QC limits high forsamples BT-12, GW-I7, EQ04 and GW-I11.

Positive analysis results should be considered estimated and shouldbe qualified UJ" whereas non-detects should be qualified as "UJ" forsamples BT-14, GW-D3, GW-D07, GW-D11, GW-D17, GW-D17RE, GW-D28,EQ05, GW-I13, GW-I14, GW-I21, GW-I25D, GW-I26, GW-I27, GW-I27MS,GW-I27MSD, GW-I28, GW-S4, GW-S14, GW-S14MSDL, GW-S17 and GW-S17D.Positive analysis results for samples BT-12, GW-I7 and GW-I11should be considered estimated and should be qualified "J"; non-detects are not qualified.

SVGA: The SVOA surrogate compounds were within QC required limitsfor recovery and retention time except for:

Sample GW-D10 had 0% recovery for the surrogates SI, S2, S3,S5, S6, S7 and S8, therefore, all analysis results for sample GW-D10 should be considered unusable and should be qualified "R".

The recovery of surrogates SI, S2, S3, S4, S5, S7, and S8 washigh in sample MBMSD; positive analysis results are qualified "J"and non-detects are not qualified.

The recovery of surrogate S8 was low in samples GW-S14, GW-D3,GW-I13, GW-I15, GW-D17 and GW-D2; no data qualification isnecessary.

Pesticide\PCB: The pesticide surrogate compounds were within QCrequired limits for recovery and retention time except for:

The recovery of Tetrachloro-m-xylene for the RTX-CLPPestcolumn was outside QC limits high in samples Method Blank3 3/20/97,GW-S7RE and GW-I16 and was outside QC limits low in samples MethodBlankl 3/21/97, GW-D20, GW-S20 and GW-I20RE.



Laboratory: Antech Ltd. Case: 0981Site: Exc essIndustrial Landfill(OH)SDG: 0981

The recovery of Tetrachloro-m-xylene for the RTX-CLPPestcolumn was 0% for samples GW-S21, GW-I09, GW-D09, GW-S26, GW-S5,GW-S3, GW-S07, GW-D17 and Method Blank2 3/19/97.

The recovery of Tetrachloro-m-xylene for the RTX-35 column wasoutside QC limits low for samples Method Blankl 3/21/97 GW-S21, GW-109, GW-D09, GW-S09RE, GW-D20, GW-S26, GW-S3 and GW-S20.

The recovery of Tetrachloro-m-xylene for the RTX-35 column was0% for samples GW-S09, GW-S5, GW-S07 and Method Blank2 3/19/97.

The recovery of Decachlorbiphenyl for the RTX-CLPPest columnwas outside QC limits high for samples GW-S11, GW-S3, GW-S07, GW-IIMS, GW-I1MSD and GW-S18 and was ouside QC limits low for samplesLCS032097, LCS032297, Method Blankl 3/21/97, GW-S27, GW-D2D and GW-S20RE.

The recovery of Decachlorobiphenyl for the RTX-CLPPest columnwas 0% for samples GW-D20 and GW-S20.

The recovery of Decachlorobiphenyl for the RTX-35 column wasoutside QC limits low for samples GW-I23, LCS032097, Method Blank23/22/97, GW-S27, GW-S6, GW-D2D, GW-D2, LCS032297, Method BlanklRE5/02/97 and GW-S25RE.

The recovery of Decachlorobiphenyl for the RTX-35 column was0% for samples GW-S21, GW-I09, GW-D09, GW-S26, GW-S5, GW-S3, GW-S07, Method Blank2 3/19/97, Method Blankl 3/21/97 and GW-S20.

Positive analysis results are considered estimated and arequalified "J" whereas non-detects are qualified "UJ" for samples GW-D2, GW-D2D, GW-I20RE, GW-I23, GW-S6, GW-S09RE, GW-S20RE, GW-S25RE,GW-S27, LCS032097, LCS032297, Method Blankl 3-21-97, Method Blank23-22-97 and Method BlanklRE 5-2-97. Positive analysis results areconsidered estimated and are qualified "J" whereas non-detects areconsidered unusable and are qualified "R" for samples GW-D09, GW-D17, GW-D20, GW-I09, GW-S3, GW-S5, GW-S07, GW-S09, GW-S20, GW-S21,GW-S26, Method Blank2 3-19-97 and Method Blankl 3-21-97.

6. MATRIX SPIKE/MATRIX SPIKE DUPLICATE

VGA: All spike recoveries and RPDs were within QC limits with theexception of low Benzene recovery for samples GW-S14MS and GW-S14MSD and high Trichloroethene recovery for samples GW-14MSD, GW-I3MS, GW-I3MSD,GW-I27MS and GW-I27MSD. The MS/MSD RPD for Benzenewas out of QC limits for sample GW-S14. Positive analysis resultsfor the unspiked sample GW-S14 for benzene and trichloroethane areconsidered estimated and are qualified as "J"; for benzene, a non-detect is also estimated and should be qualified "UJ".

SVGA: All spike recoveries and RPDs were within QC limitsexcept for:




For sample SBLK01MSD, the recovery for all spiked compoundsexceeded the upper QC limit. The RPDs for all spiked compounds forthe SBLK01MS/MSD pair exceeded the QC limits. Since the matrixspike was performed on a "blank" sample and not on the designatedsample, GW-S14, there is no qualification of the analysis resultsfor the unspiked sample GW-S14.

For samples GW-I3MS and GW-I3MSD, the recovery of 4-Nitrophenol exceeded the upper QC limit but since the recovery wasless than 100% data qualification is not necessary for 4-Nitrophenol.

For samples GW-I3MS and GW-I3MSD, the recovery ofPentachlorophenol exceeded the upper QC limit, therefore a positiveanalysis result for pentachlorophenol in the unspiked sample isconsidered estimated and is qualified "J"; data qualification isnot necessary for a non-detect..

Pest: All spike recoveries and RPDs were within QC limits exceptfor:

The recovery of Endrin and gamma-BHC was outside QC limitshigh for both samples GW-I1MS and GW-I1MSD; positive results forendrin and gamma-BHC are qualified "J" and non-detects are notqualified in the unspiked sample GW-I1.

The recovery of Heptachlor and Dieldrin was 0% in sample GW-I3MS; positive results for heptachlor and dieldrin in the unspikedsample are qualified "J" whereas non-detects are consideredunusable and are qualified "R". The recovery of Dieldrin wasoutside QC limits low for sample GW-I3MSD. The RPD for Dieldrinand 4,4'-DDT exceeded the QC limit for the MS/MSD. Positiveresults for dieldrin and 4,4'-DDT in the unspiked sample GW-I3 areestimated and are qualified "J"; a non-detect is qualified "UJ".

7. FIELD BLANK AND FIELD DUPLICATE

Samples EQ-01, EQ-02, EQ-03, EQ-04, EQ-05 and EQ-06 weredesignated as field blanks by the QAPP. The following are sampleduplicate pairs: GW-S23 and GW-S23D, GW-I25 and GW-I25D, GW-I15 andGW-I15D, GW-S20 and GW-S20D and GW-D2 and GW-D2D.

8. INTERNAL STANDARDS

VGA: The internal standards retention times and area counts for theVOA fraction were all within the required QC limits except for:

The IS2 area was low for samples GW-S14MS and GW-I14DL and theIS3 area was low for sample GW-I14DL. Positive results forcompounds associated with IS2 for samples GW-S14MS and GW-I14DL and IS3 for sample GW-I14DL should be considered




estimated and are qualified "J" whereas non-detects are alsoestimated and should be qualified "UJ". See table 4 for alist of the compounds associated with each internal standard.

SVGA: The internal standards retention times and area counts forthe SVGA fraction were all within the required QC limits exceptfor:

The areas for IS2, IS3, IS4, IS5, and IS6 were outside of QClimits high in sample MBMSD; positive results for compoundsassociated with IS2, IS3, IS4, IS5 and IS6 are estimated and arequalified "J" whereas non-detects are qualified "UJ". See table 4for a list of the compounds associated with each internal standard.

9. COMPOUND IDENTIFICATION

VOA and SVGA target compounds (TCLs) and TentativelyIdentified Compounds (TICs) were identified using a GC/MS "bestfit" library search method.

10. COMPOUND QUANTITATION AND REPORTED DETECTION LIMITS

All samples were waters. The VOA, SVGA and Pesticide targetCRQLs were properly reported. SVOA target compound quantitationwas properly reported. Most VOA target compound quantitation wasproperly reported. The Pesticide target compound quantitation werenot properly reported. The reported pesticide sample analysisresults do not match the raw analysis data from the GC/ECDchromatograms; there is a different multiplier for different targetanalyte pesticides for the same sample when the raw data and theForm 1 results are compared. Pesticide analysis results for allsamples should be considered estimated and should be qualified "J"or "UJ".

11. SYSTEM PERFORMANCE

GC/MS baseline indicated acceptable performance. The GCbaseline for pesticide analysis was not acceptable; there werenumerous extraneous peaks and baseline disturbances.

12. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

The lab mis-spiked several extraction batches. They used a matrixspike solution instead of a surrogate solution which required re-extraction of samples outside of holding time with a reduced samplevolume.




The lab was aware of the Florisil cartridge lot failure butchose to use that lot of Florisil cartridges for pesticideanalysis.

Pesticide FORM II (page 1352) improperly used the D flag toexclude 0% surrogate recoveries from the outlier flag; none of thesamples listed with a D flag was analyzed at a dilution greaterthan 1.


CASUSASf:COLUMN:

CAUBRAT10N OUTUERVotolk TCL

cr«o« i •* 11LABORATORY;

NAME:A

HEATED PURGE CY/NJ,

Instruwnt ID: (?_^r (lfrts~(Date-Tlaw:

CMoromethantIrontfvthan*

Vinyl Chleridt

ChtoroethaneKethytene ChlorideAcetoneCarbon Dlsulf fdeIjVDfchloroethene1.1-Dichloroethane1^2-OfchloroetKene t&ttf)Chterofoni1.2-Dtchtoroethane

itanont^t.1-Tr1chloroethaneCarbon TetracMorfde•rcnodichloromethane1 . 2 -D 1 ch I or opr opaneeU-IjS-DtcMoroprppen*

Tr i c^ * oroetftene1i D > br offlocn I oroêthane

1,1,2-Trlchloroethanelenient

trans-M-OtcMoropropencRrofflofom

4-Kethyl -2-Pentanont2-NexanoneTetracMorotthent

2.2-Tetrachloroethane

Tttutnc

CKtorobenzen*

Cthyl benzene

ftyreneXylene (total)

Totuene-d,

I r ore f 1 uo r obeni ent

1.2-Dlchloroethane-d,,

zu

i

0.010b.ioo0.1000.0100.0100.010

0.0100.1000.2000.0100.2003.1000.0100.1000.1003.2000.0103.2000.3000.1000.1000.500D.1000.1000.0100.010

0.200

D.300

O.iOO

o.soo0.100

0.300

0.300

0.010

0.200

0.010

1

(

^/

0

6

Inltla3/>-If

tF

,/#.

1*4*f>~*;.>r»~

M<i>,(,*•)

14 "1*1

.i'lt*-

'.>T5

1 tot.^/^7

?>J»SD

^

^y-

.

•

J

Cent.v^..-Ik'tttRF

tot.:/ 7

•TIB •

Cant.)/-Hj

•F

>,orf:x.0xi.t>->-)

9^1

/,3 r*

tot./ ^-7

rtt

'3£f><&/">s r

->*.*

•XV i.

*

3Tr

j

r

Cant.?/>

^tr

fo*O?

&-V3

tot.x/^7'.<>~t -

ID

>^.^

*sr.r

*7

J~

Cant.

v>^^<^— —— 1RF

aM<*

tot.

tt>

•>>//

•

r

Effected .fc/L

Revtewer'a tnft/Oatt:J

* Mfnfnja telaifvt tesponsa Factor. .,.-„ - -s**-r*7a Thete ft«9» *Hould be applied to the anatytes on the sample data -..,....Jfl • Alt potftlve results are estimated, "J* and non-detected results are inutable

CACE/SAS*:,COLUMN:.

CAUBRATION OUTUE*Votetle. TCL

(P*9< 1 •* II

_

HEATED HMOE|Y/NI

LABORATORY: JTtJTC'Cstf'SITE NAME: 5> U ti^f ir>J*£

Instrument 10: £. X/~£/S/- k-L-Date:Tfm:

0

CMorometKwit|romon»thap*

Vinyl ChlorideCMoroethaneKethylen* ChlorideAcetoneCarbon Dlsulf fde1,1-Dichloroethent1_.1-Dichloroe thane1.2-Diehloroethene (total)Chloroform1,2-Ofchloroethane

jtanoneIjl^l-TriehloroethaneCarbon TetrachlorfdcV romedtchloromethane1_.2-D ich loroprooaneels-1,3-Dtc*iloroprop*neTriehloroethene0 ibromoch I oromethaneIÎ^Z-Trlchloroetharwlenzmetrana- 1,3-0 UhloropropeneBromofonn4-Kethyl-2-Pentanone2-Nexar.one

Tctrachtorotthene2,2-Tetrachlorocthane

TolueneChlorobenzeneCthylbenzene•tyrene

Xylene (total)

Toluene-d,

Bronofluorobemen*

1,2-Otchloroethvw-tf,

0.0100.100

0.1000.0100.0100.010

D.0«0.1000.2000.010

0.2000.1000.0109.100

0.1000.2000.0100.2000.3000.100

0.1000.5000.1000.1000.0100.010

0.200

0.300

0.400

o.soo0.100

0.300

0.300

0.010

0.200

0.010

Initial UU

"V/f/fV •f 73-/

„ i

M.3J»*

&Ho

rt*i

6/,>V3

«*wVi*n

XRSD

>.

>7.f

•

r

?

Cant. Cal.

?/?-?/ 0^/^ f .

RF

'f,/^'

f-?f' .

otff0.**

«

^4?

-i£r

?**->«;.».

•

•

j

3

Jr

t*Z>K\tJrfTFrfTi

V-tr

o.M^V

a&1»>•«

^^ ^<V»

^^

?0««.i

•

T

r1

Cent. Cat.?/Wo .^ // . t /

t»

i/.'lvrA><fi

»

>4f-ir** —,-x-

1-

,r

Cent. Cal.

., » •

^^

teviewer's Inft/Datt:

KTV7

* Kinfmi te tat fve RespdhttS Jh*"f'W ihould I* »PpHed to fh'e'anatyte* on the sample date *he«U.J/I » Alt positive results are estimated, »J" tnd non-detected remits are unusable

CALIBRATION OUTUEHStrntvobtle TCL

<Pa0a 1*2)

CASE/SAS r.COLUMN: _

tAIORATORYl

Iratronmt tOt ALwatt:

Initial Cat. Cant. CftU Cont. CaU Cant. Cftt. Cont. CaU

Mm:ir ir | A tr •F

0.8003. TOO

2-CMerophenol 0.830

1,3-Qtchloroberatno 9.6000.5003.400

2-M« thy I phenol O.TOOD.010 J" 2££ JL

4-Methytphtnol 5.600D.5005.1003.200

Itophoront 3.4002-lMtrophtnol D.100 T

D.200bfs(2*Ch(efetthoxy)ti«th»f« D.SOO

3.2001_12_i4-Trlch[orobeniene 3.200

0.7000.010 i3.0103.2003.400

Keiftch 1 or ecyc 1 ep«nt »di *nt 0.010 J trD.2003.7000.800

t-KitrwnUInt 0.010Cfmelhylp^thiUtt 0.010

0.900

0.2003-NftroanUln* 0.010 T

0.900

2.4-OlnTtroph*nol 0.010

tffeetetf

§wt»O

:ev(ewer'a Inlt/Date:

ReUttve fetponie' Factor.• These fl»8« theutd be appUed to tRrtfrtytei on the *vrpte dtt^chMtt.J/l • Alt potltlva re»ult§ are wtiwted «J» and non-detected re»utt» art u«»bto ••»

COLUMN:

HHf. »f ^CALIBRATION OUTUDI

TCL

LABORATORY:,SJTE NAME:

Instrument 1C IDtttl

InltUl Cat. Cent. C«U Cant. Cal. Cent. Cat. Cont. Cal.

1*L»1 rs i»i• F • F tF tF IF

4-Nitrocfcffnet 0.010O.BDO

Z,4-DTnttrctetuene O.?00

ftltttiylcMhalatt 0.0100.400

riuortn* O.WO4-NUrD*n1llnc 0.010

0.010 TD.010

4 -• remophenyl - pê^y I *t her 0.1003.100

•enucMerophmel 0.050

Phtnanthrant D.TOOAnthractn* 0.7DD

0.010

0.010fluor»nthtne 0.600•yrtnt 0.600

0.0100.0100.830

Chrysm 0.7000.010

0.010 14tC•fnzo(b) f 1 uor-ftnthtnt 0.700

0.7000.7003.SDD0.400

,h. f )peryt «ne 0.500 01613 r0.200

0.700

0.500

O.BDO

0.600

.010

.800

0.400

f Kfntnji tttitfvc tespo^sc F»etor.' Then ftigi ftfowtd be Applied to tKt »-%a1ytM on the ts-pl« ci*t«J/l • All potltlv* rrsa'tt arc rtti fc'.Ki mjm »-rf ron-d«tect«^ results

Inft/H»tt:

CAUftRATlON OUTUIHf ^mfvobll* TCt

*f U

COLUMN:lAtORATOKYt«JTtNAMfc__

Inttruvnt ttf JiiLotttr

InltUl Cat. C«nt. tol. C«nt. Cwrt. Cent. C*U

Rf I PSD I IP tr tr •r0.8DOO.TOO0.630

l,i-PUMorob»ni»nt 0.6000.5000.400

2'Mtthyljfrtnel O.TOO9.010 r

4-Htthytp^tnot 3.6000.5000.500O.?00o.&oo

1-iHtrophtnot 5.100 ^£fl. 5^£/ £.0.200

t14*ptcMoropf>tf<el 0.2000.200O.TDO

4-ChteremUlne 0.010 Jl0.010D.200

:.4oo0.010D.200D.2000.600

M(ftre»nt|fnt D.010

0.010

0.900

2,6-Ptnftretcluefw 0.2003>Vftfo»n!tffw 0.010 *

0.900

0.010

I/'JMt/Dittz

g^/)y^/^5/)^

»/ j• TKnt fU;t ftôuttf t* Apptfed to theJ/T • At( pctltfvt retutti «rt

en the **rt» data &>ie«ts.d ravdet*ct*4 re»utti »ri

CASE'S AjCOLUMN:

CAUBRAT>ON OUTUERTCL

LABORATORY:WTE NAME;

Iratrv/wtt

D«tt:InttUl Ul. Cent. Cat. tot. UU Cant. C«U C«nt.

T^L nil I5ZIF uso IF tr tf «_i0.010O.BOD

2,4-Blnftretetw*** 0,?DO

0.01D

C.953

4-KftrotMlfftt CJDtOC.C10 A/V7C.C10

.IOD

O.C50 Jl

.010

.610

.600

.690

.CIO

.010 x/ r HUO.EDOC.TODC.C1D

0.010 rO.TOOD.TOOC.TO

0.5000.400

C.20D

O.TOO

0.400

C.6DO

2-FtueropKtnet C.6000.010

C.6DO

f Kfnlfui Itttttvt trspc^se f»ctcr• Thtu ft igt »K>jttf t« »?^tiei toJ/I • All potftlvt

Inlt/Ditt:

cbtftresuttt »rt

CALIBRATION OUTUERP*.rtlcU«ff>CB TCL

0>ag» 1 of II

COLUMN:LABORATORY:SITE NAME:

Irvtruncnt NtfterD.te ftfcOJTTfm

tlphi-IHC

beta-lHCdelt»-IHCgamwlHCMepachlerAldrfnHeptachlor EpoxldcIndosulfan IDttldrin4.i'-OOEEndMnCndosulfan 114,4 '-000Cndotutfan Julfite4.4'-OOTKethorychlop

Endrln tetoneEndrln Aldehyde• tpâ*Oi(ordanefivma*ChlerdaneArelcor 1016Areclor 1221Arocler 1232Arolcer 1242A roc I OP 1248Arocler 1254Aroclor 1260

Initial UL.

Ifrjff?nututso

^

•

r>

Cont, Cat*1fa/*13\0d» •

Cont. Cal.*/**/*•>

«>;vy» •

Cont. Cat.tilw/r?04*^

ID

-^ ,•^<-

y^->^

•

,3,;

r7

Cent. Ut.

VT i -fH<ÎD *

Affected Samples; 57l£/

tol

6o <***>•

* The*t flags should t* applUo* to the analytes on tKe sanplt data sheets.J/I « Alt potitiva results ara Mtfmatad »J« and non-detected results are unusable U"

tevftwtr's Init/Datt;

CASE/SAS «!.COLUMN: &T

CALIBRATION OUTLIERr*ttIcld«/PCB TCt

(Paga 1 of 1)

LABORATORY;SITE NAME:

Instnjoent Mu**r ^^Datt 4^>^ -L*TIM

elpht-lHCbeta-tHCdelta-IMCVanrw-IHCKepachlerAldrfnKeptacMor EpoxfdeEndosulfan tDftldHn4. 4 '-ODEEndrinEndosulfan 114, 4 '-ODDEndosulfan Sutfate4,4'»OOTHethevychlorEndrln tetooeCndrln Aldehydeatpha-Chtordaneganna-ChlerdaneArelcor 1016Arecler 1221Areeter 1232Areleer 1242Aroctor 1248Arecler 1254Aroclor 1260

Initial Cat.

USD •

Cent. Cat.r/i/*/tf "7(ML

ID •

Cent. Cal.

fc «{tt •

Cent. Cat.

frf%4>

tt> •

Cent. Cal.5"///^QQFb

& •

Affected Samples:

• Theti flags should be ftpplf*d te tht ftr*(yte* on th« (anplt data theft*.J/l • All positive results are **tfir»ted "J" and non-detected results are unusable "A"

ftevftwer'a Init/Date: ^ f

CALIBRATION OUTUEKPertlcMeTPCi TCL

(Tag* 1 «f 1)

CASE'S AS 9:COLUMN: CITE

IrtttrvMnt KJ**rDatt 456* WTla»

•1ph|-»NC

bcta-tNCtftttt-IHC

«ftt1P«-|NC

Nep«ch 1 orAldrfnMepttchler t pox id*tndosutfvn 1OUtdrin4. 4* -DDEIndrfntndo»utf»n II4.4'-DDOEndesutf*n futfate4>'-ODTKtthojrychtorEndrfn Kttor*Cndrln Aldehyde•lpbt-CMord*n*

Banrw-Ch[erd*f>«Arotcer 1016Aroelor 1221Aroclor 1232Arotcor 1242Aroclor 1248Aroclor 1254Aroclor 1260

InltUt C*Utsly*l&)

•»so

U

•

w>

Cent. C«t.

A •

Cant. C»l.

fi> •

Cent. CtU.

» *

Cont. Cat.

tt •

Affecttd

Kevfewer'i Inlt/D»tt:

The«t f l»f l« thouttf be »pp((«d to the •nl • All poif t tve reautti ar* Mt luted

te* on the »w*plt datae tf non-detected result* are irusable H"

CALIBRATION OUTUERFavtlddWPCI TCL

(Paga 1 •M)

C'ASE/SAS*:____COLUMN: f.T\ "3 V

LABORATORY:SITE NAME:

Irwtmnant MtJ*«rDatt &<! /> TfHt

•lpha-MC

t*t»-|HC

dettt-iHCvamna-BHCMepachlorAldrlnHeptachtor EpoxldcEndetulfan 1Oittdrin4, 4 '-DDEEndrlnEndotultin 114,4'*DDDEndo«utf»n Sutftt*

4,4'*WTHethorycMor

Endrln ret oneEndrln Aldehyde•tph§-Chtord»neiftnrnt-ChLerdBneArotcor 1016Aroeler 1221Aroclor 1232Arotcor 12&2Aroclor 1248Aroclor 1254A roc tor 1260

Initial C*l.<*f>r/ni-**.*-}

XX SO

-M —

•

r

Cent. C*l..//*y<r>

f**'tt •

Cent. Cat.<//*»'*•?

,/f^f

» *

Cont. Cal.&}#/*

K<~*» •

Cent. CaU<? /0>?'49

V •

Affected

OV7

f ^<-—7^tevtaw*r'a Inft/Datt: /

• Thru ft»B« Should t* applf«d to tht »M[ytes on the tanplt dat« the«ta.J/R • Alt positive retultt »r« tttfmtttd *J" and non-detected result! art unusabU

!

CALIBRATION OUTUERPettJcide/PCt TCL

1 * 1)

CASE/SAS *COLUMN:

..ffj LABORATORY!SITE NAME:

Instranant Jfujfceroat* ^cOÔkTiHt

al*a-BHCbert-BHCdelta-IHCgamwINCMepaehlorAldrlnNeptacMor EpoxfdeEndotulfan IDUldrln4,4'*ODEEndrlnEndosulfin 114, 4 '-000

Endosulfin Sulfftte4,4'-ODTMethoryehlorEndrln tetoneEndrln Aldehydealpha-CMordaneBarrne*Ch(ordaneArolcer 1016A roc I or 1221Aroclor 1232

Arolcor 1242Aroclor 1248A roc tor 1254A roc tor 1260

Initial Cal.

USD *

Cant. Cat.

^tt •

Cant. Cal.

» •

Cant* Cal.

» •

Cent. Cal.

tt •

Affected

* Th«e flags should be apptfed to the anatyte* on the svrple data aheeta.J/« « All petit!vt results are Mtfnated *J« »rd non-detected results are unusable "••

tevtawtr'a tnft/Datt:

TABLE 4(For MuW-Madfa, MuM-Concantratfon Analyafel

VOLATUf WTBMAL STANDARDS WITH CORRESPOND*!) TCL ANALYTGB ASSMNCD FOR OUANflTATKNI

Bromochloromathan*

ChloromathanaBromomathanaVinyl chloridaChloroathanaMathylana chloridaAcatonaCarbon dbutflda1,1-Dichloraathana1.1-CMchloroathana1.2-DwMoroattiana(t0ta|>Chloroform1(2-DichkHoathana1,2-Dkhkm>athana-d«(MiiT,wno)2-Butanona

SOMVOLATIU VfTBMAL STANDARDS WITH CORRESPONOaMQ TO. ANALYTS ASSMNH> FOR OUANfTTATION

Bromoform1,1,1 -TrichlonMthan*C«tfoon t«tracMorid«Bromodichlorom«thMw1.2-Dichloroprop«n*

- 1 (3-DlcMoroprop«M

DtoromoeMororiMthMM1,1,2-TrlchlonMthMM ,B«nz«n«d»- 1 ,3-DtehtoropropMw

2-H«xanon«4-M«thyl-2-pwitanon«T«trachloro«th*n«1 , 1 ,2,2-T«trachten>«tfwn«Tofciwi*CMorob«nz*n«Ethylbwiz«n«Styr«n«

BromofluoffolMn2*n*(»urr,Mne)

2-ChlorophMwl1.3-Dtchlorob«nz«i«1.4-Oiehlorobwiz«M2.2*-OxyMs- (1 -cnJoroprofMn*)1,2-Dfchlorob*niMM2-M«thylph«nolbic(2-ChloroteopfopyD«th«r4-MathylphwiolN-nftroco-df-n-propylMnin*Hexachloro«th«n«2-Ftuoroph«nol(»urr|Ph*nol*dc(*urr)2-ChloroDWizwi«-d4(Mirr)

Nkrob«nz«n«Ivopnoronc2*NltropnMiol2.4-Dlm«thvlph»nol

HcxacMorooyclopMitftdltrM2.4.e-Trlohloroph«rwl2.4,o-Trichteroph*nol

bte (2-CMoRMthoxy hnflttMiM2.4-DfchkxoplMnol1 ,2,4-Trlchlorob«ni«rM4-Chloroanlln*H*x«chk>robut«UMW4- Chk>ro-3-m«thy (phenol2-M«thytraphtrMilMWNKrob«nz«n»-d((iurr)

2-NHnwnMn*Dlm«thylphttMtoUAewMphthylwM3-NitroanWn«AcwMphthwi*2*4* DMtropnwMN4-N)trophwiolDfbwizofuran2.4-Dinltrotoluwi«2.6-Dfnttrotoluwi*Dtothyl phtlwtat*4-Chk>roph«ny1 ph«nyl «th«rFkfOTMW

4-Nftro«nWn«2-FluoroWph«nyH«urfJ2,4,6- Tribromoph«noHmrr)

4-BromophMiyl phwiyl «ch*rH»xachkKob«ni«n«

Pyranabutyfe«nzy1 phthahta3.3'-DtcMorobanildlnaBanto(a )anthraoana

ChrysanaPh*n«mhr*n«Anthra CM !•Dt-n-butyl phthatet*Fhionnth«n«

Parvtona-di.

Dl-n-ootyl phthalataBanio(b)fluoranthanaBanzo(k)fluoranthanaBanzo(a)pyranalndano( 1,2,3-otl)pyranaOtjanzo(a,h lanthracanaBanzo(g.hJ>p«rytan«

iiurrl - •urrogata(•mo) - •y«t*m montorhtg compound

OLM01.1 (3/90)



DATE:

SUBJECT;

FROM;

TO


Stephen L. OBtrodka, Chief (HSRL-5J)Superfund Technical Support Section

Data User: P

We have reviewed the data for the following case

SITE NAME:

CASE NUMBER: SDG NUMBER:

Number' and Type of Samples:/

c*"* /n -V /*' < jSample Numbers: ;>JI£L- r$-^j?^ X- Qj— "E*<~<-i

Laboratory: L {- A Hrs. for Review


cc: "Regional TPOCecilia Luckett AA & OSM-5J


Laboratory: Lancaster Laboratories Case:Site: Excess Industrial Landfill SDG:


Sixty-one (61) water samples, numbered GW-12I, GW-D12,GW-S23, GW-S23-D, GW-D23, GW-I23, GW-S10, GW-S11, GW-S21,GW-I09, GW-S09, GW-D09, GW-S26, GW-S5, GW-S01, GW-S3, GW-S7,GW-S18, GW-I1, EQ-02, GW-D3, GW-D09, GW-D11, GW-I21, GW-S4,GW-S17-D, GW-S15, GW-I3, GW-I7, EQ-04, GW-I11, GW-D28, GW-I26,GW-I27, EQ-05, GW-I27, GW-I25, GW-I25-D, GW-I13, GW-I15,GW-I15-D, GJW-D01, GW-D27, GW-I18, GW-I14, GW-S14, EQ-06, GW-D20,GW-S20, GW-I20, GW-S20-D, GW-S17, GW-I22, GW-I24, EQ-03, GW-I10,GW-S24, GW-S25, GW-S27, GW-S6, GW-I16, GW-D17, GW-D2-D, GW-D2,GW-D10, and GW-I3 were collected on March 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 19,and 20, 1997. The lab received the samples on March 14,15,18,and 20, 1997 in good condition. The samples were analyzed forVolatile Headspace Hydrocarbon and CO2 by Headspace.

The VOA analyses were performed within the technical holdingtimes of 14 days after sample collection; therefore the resultsare acceptable.

Samples GW-I1, GW-I3, and GW-I27 were designated by thefield personnel to be used for the matrix spike/matrix spikeduplicate in this data set.

Reviewed by: T. Sedlacek Lockheed Martin/ESATDate: October 16, 1997


Laboratory : Lancaster Laboratories Case :Site : Excess Industrial Landfill SDG:

1. HOLDING TIME

Sixty-one (61) water samples, numbered GW-12I, GW-D12,GW-S23, GW-S23-D, GW-D23, GW-I23, GW-S10, GW-S11, GW-S21,GW-I09, GW-S09, GW-D09, GW-S26, GW-S5, GW-S01, GW-S3, GW-S7,GW-S18, GW-I1, EQ-02, GW-D3, GW-D09, GW-D11, GW-I21, GW-S4,GW-S17-D, GW-S15, GW-I3, GW-I7, EQ-04, GW-I11, GW-D28, GW-I26,GW-I27, EQ-05, GW-I27, GW-I25, GW-I25-D, GW-I13, GW-I15,GW-I15-D, GW-D01, GW-D27, GW-I18, GW-I14, GW-S14, EQ-06, GW-D20,GW-S20, GW-I20, GW-S20-D, GW-S17, GW-I22, GW-I24, EQ-03, GW-I10,GW-S24, GW-S25, GW-S27, GW-S6, GW-I16, GW-D17, GW-D2-D, GW-D2,GW-D10, and GW-I3 were collected on March 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 19,and 20, 1997. The lab received the samples on March 14, 15, 18,and 20, 1997 in good condition. The samples were analyzed forVolatile Headspace Hydrocarbon and CO2 by Headspace .


2. GC INSTRUMENT PERFORMANCE

All samples were analyzed within the periods required forinstrument performance checks. The standards displayed baselineseparation between the analytes of interests and for thesurrogate .

3. CALIBRATION

Initial and continuing calibrations of the VolatileHeadspace Hydrocarbons and CO2 were evaluated for target compoundlist and outliers are recorded on the forms included as part ofthis narrative. T in,CXwJe<4 *Oiik T\ &-*•*-&-+-*>*' *^ ^ itlc -±tu <Z I

4. BLANKS

Method Blank 3/26/97, Method Blank 4/02/97 and Method Blank



Laboratory: Lancaster Laboratories Case :Site: Excess Industrial Landfill SDG:

3/24/97 are the volatile method blanks. The blanks containednone of the target compounds. The method blank summary lists thesamples associated with each blank. Every day the COg analysiswas conducted a Helium Blank was run, no analytes were found inthis instrument/method blanks.


Samples GW-I1, GW-I3, and GW-I27 were designated by the fieldpersonnel to be used for the matrix spike/matrix spike duplicatein this data set.

The volatile system monitoring compound used for VolatileHeadspace Hydrocarbon analysis was within QC required limits forrecovery and retention time; therefore the results areacceptable.

6. LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE AND SPIKE/SPIKE DUPLICATE

All spike recoveries LCS 4/02/97, LCDup 4/02/97, LSC3/26/97, LCDup 3/26/97, GW-I1MS, GW-I1MSD, LSC 3/24/97, LCDUP3/24/97, GW-13MS GW-13MSD, GW-I14MS, and GW-I14MSD were within QClimits/ therefore the results are acceptable.


Not required for this analysis.


Not used for this analysis


Target compounds (TCLs) were identified using a "best fit"retention time method.



Laboratory: Lancaster Laboratories Case:Site: Excess Industrial Landfill SDG:


All target detection limits were properly reported andadjusted for dilutions as needed. All target compoundquantitation was properly reported.


The GC baseline for all analysis was acceptable.


Several samples required dilutions due to high levels ofMethane, lab reported a combined Forml with the detection limitfor each analyte properly corrected for dilutions used to producereported results.




IX

DATE:

SUBJECT:

FROM:


Stephen L. Ostrodka, Chief (HSRL-5J)Superfund Technical Support Section

TO: Data User: PfP-

I//

We have reviewed the data for the following case:

SITE NAME:

CASE NUMBER:

Number' and Type of Samples:

Sample Numbers:

Laboratory:


SDG NUMBER:

1~ Q+- '7

Hrs. for Review

cc: Regional TPOCecilia LuckettSM-5J


Laboratory: Ross Analytical Case:Site: Excess Industrial Landfill SDG:


One SUHHA CANISTER, was collected on April 8, 1997 The labreceived the sample on April 8, 1997 in good condition. The samplewas analyzed for the full list of volatile organic analytes by EPAMethod TO-14 and Permanent Gases by EPA Method 3C.

The VOA analyses were performed within the technical holdingtimes of 14 days after sample collection; therefore the results areacceptable.

Reviewed by: T. Sedlacek, Lockheed Martin/ESATDate: October 15, 1997



1. HOLDING TIME

One SUMMA CANISTER, was collected on April 8, 1997 The labreceived the sample on April 8, 1997 in good condition. Thesample was analyzed for the full list of volatile organicanalytes by EPA Method TO-14 and Permanent Gases by EPA Method3C.



All GC/MS tuning complied with mass list and ion abundancecriteria for BFB, and all samples were analyzed within the twelve(12) hour periods for instrument performance checks.

3. CALIBRATION

Initial and continuing calibrations of the Volatile, andPermanent Gas standards were evaluated for target compound listand outliers are recorded on the forms included as part of thisnarrative.

4. BLANKS

VOA: VBLK0416C is the volatile method blanks. The blankcontained none of the target compounds. The method blank summarylists the samples associated with each blank.


The volatile system monitoring compounds were within QCrequired limits for recovery and retention time; therefore the




results are acceptable.

6. LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE

All spike recoveries were within QC limits for CS0416C;therefore the results are acceptable.




The internal standards retention times and area counts forthe VOA fraction were all within the required QC limits:therefore the results are acceptable.


Target compounds (TCLs) were identified using a "best fit"library search method.


All target detection limits were properly reported. Alltarget compound quantitation was properly reported.


GC/MS baseline indicated acceptable performance. The GCbaseline for permanent gas analysis was acceptable.


None.


CASE'S AS*:..COLUMN:

CAUBRATTON OUTUCRVoUtU TCL

(Faga 1*1)

1 *i.iir

LABORATORY:•ITE NAME; T.uJ^ rW

HEATED PURGE (Y/N).

Instrxmnt ID: /^ fOo±Date:Tf«t:

t

Chloromethftnt

Iromonethan*Vfnyt ChlorldtChlore«th«n*H*thylent CMortdtActtoncC»i-bon Df*utf<dt1,1-0tchtopo«th»n«1,1-OlcMorotthan*1,2-DlcMorotthene (tottl)CMorofor*

1,2*Dfehtoro€thintI Etnen*1 ?T. 1 -Tr 1 eh t orotthtntCtrbon Tctrtchlorlde•rorcdicKIoronvthtrte1.Z-Dfch(oropro0«nteU-1, 3-0 (rttoropf open*

TrlchloPMthen*Of bômoch I eroncthBnt1.1.2-TrlcMoroethrw•enienctf»n§-1,3-D(chloropropen«Iromoform4-Wethyl -2-Pentanont2-McxanoncTctr»ehlorotthtnt

2.2-Tetraehteretthane

TelutntCh t orobenztrw

CthylbenxencttyreneXylene (total)

Totuent-d,

Sromofluorobenien*1,2-DicMorotth»nf<.

b.oio0.1000.1000.0103.0100.0100.0103.1000.2000.010

0.2003.1000.0103.1000.1003.200D.0100.2000.3003.100

3.1000.500

b.ioo0.1DO0.010D.010

0.200

D.3DO

D.400

0.500

0.100

D.300

0.300

0.010

0.200

0.010

Initial Cat.Wom

•P fit SO •

Cant. CaU

feF »

•

•

-

Cwt. Cal.

IF » •

Cant. Cat.

tr -)»

tt »

Cont. Cal.

tr A •

Effected tanclet:

levtewer'a Inft/Datt:

letatlv* tespon»a racter.£ Thet« flags thould be apptfed to the analytt* on the cwrpte d*r» thecta.J/t » Alt poatttva retultt ara estfmated, "J" and non-detected results are irusable

CAUBRATYON OUTUEftVolatle TCL

i •* i»wwkwmiw* ——— .* « i • • • iiHEATED "WOE (Y/N) __., /^

LABOfUTOKV:SITE NAME:

Imtmwnt tOs p f00t-Oate:Tta»:

•

ChloromethaneIromomethant

Vinyl ChlorideCMoroe thaneMethylene ChlorideAcetoneCarbon OUul tide1,1-Olchloroethene1^1-Olehloroethane1.2-D1ehloroethene (total)Chloroform1.2-Dfchloroethane

jtanone" •' ' " "

Ijljl-TrlehloroethofteCarbon Tetrachlorfde•romodfchloromethane1.2-DfchtoropropanecU-1.3-01chloroprop«neTrUhtoroetheneDfbromochloronethene1.1.2-Trtchloroethane•entenet rant • 1 ,3-0 Uh I oropropene•romofona

*>Kethyl-2-»entanone2-KexanoneTatrachloroethena

(ZiZ* T et rach i oroetnane

TolueneChlorobenzeneCthytbenienettyreneVylene (total)

i Toluene**^tr omof t uorobenient

1,2-Otchloroethane-d.

0.0100.100

0.1000.0100.010to. 0100.0100.1000.2003,010

0.2003.1003.0103.1000.1003.2000.0100.2003.3003.100

0.100D.SOO0.1003.1000,0100.010

0.200

0.300

0.400

0.5000.1000.3000.300

0.010

0.200

0.010

Initial CaU*//i/O

Itfc• F

•^/rf"*

ftMSO •

Cent. Cat.

WlQ•r

<-f/7ev

»

*6&

*

•

J

Cant. Cal.

•F tt •

Cant. Cal.

—

tr » •

Cant, Cal.

RF tt *

Hffected

levlewer'a Inft/Date:

* Xinfnji telatlve tesponte factor.* These ftaflf thoultf be applied to the anatyte* on the sanpte dataJ/I • Alt positive results are estimated^ mJm and non-detected results are unusable

CALIBRATION OUTLIERSADDITIONAL TCL COMPOUNDS

CASE\SASft.COLUMNS

CONTRACTOR ISITE NAMEt

*-

- ——— — — ••—••" • — — •— y • ' • —— —— ——Instrument* : iT" * °Date /Time

Viwl fre-J-xfe'

Init. Cal.y/Uf? /£&RF %RSP *

Cont. Cal.V//7/V? jXÔ

RF ^D

*

*

Cont. Cal.

RF %P *

Cont. Cal.

W %D *

Cont. Cal.

RF %D *





.. The VOA analyses were performed within the technical holdingtimes of 14 days after sample collection; therefore the resultsare acceptable.




1. HOLDING TIME




All GC/MS tuning complied with mass list and ion abundancecriteria for BFB, and all samples were analyzed within the twelve(12) hour periods for instrument performance checks.

3 . CALIBRATION

Initial and continuing calibrations of the Volatile, andPermanent Gas standards were evaluated for target compound listand outliers are recorded on the forms included as part of thisnarrative.

4. BLANKS

VOA: VBLK0507C is the volatile method blank. The HELIUM BLANK isthe method blank for the permanent gas anal/sis. Neither blankcontained any of the target compounds. The method blank summarylists the samples associated with each blank.


The volatile system monitoring compounds were within QCrequired limits for recovery and retention time; therefore the




results are acceptable.

6. LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE

All spike recoveries were within QC limits for CS0507C;therefore the results are acceptable.




The internal standards retention times and area counts forthe VOA fraction were all within the required QC limits with theexception of the area for Chlorobenzed5 was low in FLAIRDL andFLAIR. ????


Target compounds (TCLs) were identified using a "best fit"library search method.


All target detection limits were properly reported. Alltarget compound quantitation was properly reported.


GC/MS baseline indicated acceptable performance. The GCbaseline for permanent gas analysis was acceptable.


None.


CASENSAS*:COLUMN:

CALIBRATION OUTLIERSLOW CONCENTRATION WATER VOLATILE TCL COMPOUNDS

(Page 1 of 1)___ LABORATORY:

SITENAME:HEATED PURGE (Y/N):

Instrument* ^<TQt)t I 1 Initial Oil. 1 Contin. Cal. 1 Contin. Cal. 1 Contin. Cal. 1 Contin. Cal.Date/Time: 1 I <7AfW ffi<6\ Cfr/r> rt<T?

I # 1 rfChloromcthane 1 0.01 1Bromomethane 10.10]Vinvl chloride !0.10|Chloroethane 10 OilMethvtene chloride 10.011 JAcetone 1 0.01 !Carbon diiulfidc 1 0.01 11.1-Dichloroethene 10. 1011.1-Dichloroethane 10.201cis-1 .2-Dichloroethene [0.101trans-1 .2-Dichloroethene 1 0. 1 0 1Chloroform 10.20!1 .2-Dichk>roethane 1 0. 10 12-Butanone 10.01!BromochloFomethane 10.10!1.1.1-Trichlorocthane 10.101Carbon tetrachloride 10.101Bromodichloromethane 1 0.20 11 .2-DichloroDrooane 1 0.01 1cii-1.3-Dichk>roDrODcnc 1 0.20 1Trichloroethene 1 0.30 1Dibromochloromethane 1 0. 10 !1 .1 .2-Trichloroethane ! 0. 10 1Benzene 10.501tnn-1 .3-DichlorooroDene 1 0. 1 0 1Bromoform 10.10!4-Mcthvl-2-ocnt«nonc 1 0.01 !2-Hexanone 10. 01!Tetrachloroethene |0.20|1 .1 .2.2-Tetrachloroethane 1 0.50 11 .2-Dibromoethtnc 1 0. 1 0 !Toluene 10.401Chlorobcnzenc 10.50!Ethvlbenzene 10. 101Stvrene 10.30!Xvlcncrtotal) 10.30)1 .2-Dibromo-3-chloroDroi>»ne ! 0. 1 0 11 .3-Dichlorobenzene ! 0.60 !1 .4-Dichlorobenzene ! 0.50 15 f <fl1 .2-Dichlorobenzene ! 0.40 1> WBromofluorobcnzene ! 0.40 1

%nd *

>%f IT**•<> \S

rf %d *

!Samrlci affected: f/WLvmC*

\tb*nvc-\?U&*bUrUHr/L

rf %d * rf %d * rf %d

.

*

1

Rcvicwcr'i

J/R - All positive results are estimated "J" and non-detected results arc unusable "R"

* = These flags should be applied to the analytes on the sample data sheets.9 = Minimum Relative Response Factor ESAT-WB0.5 L95

UAT440.I Mi

CALIBRATION OUTLIER*ADDITIONAL TCL COMPOUNDS

CASC\BAS*ICOLUMNl

CONTRACTOR SBITE NAME I

Inatrumcnt*! Init. Cal. Cent. Cal. Cont. Cal Cont. Cal Cont. CalDate/Time

RF *RSD %P RF %D • %D * RF %D *rft&A/ r

JJ",r

CALIBRATION OUTUEftVotetb TCL

1 «T 1)

COLUMN: ___'HEATED PURGE

LABORATORY:•JTE NAME:

ln»trifi»nt 10: FrCttf <_D»tt:T<M:

- - . -. .,« •CMoronethtnt|rowometh»nt

Vinyl ChlorideCMoroeth»ntKethylene ChlorideAc* ton*

C»rbon Dliulffde1,1-Ofehteretthtnc1.1-OicKtoro*th»rw1,2-0lcht0roethe«e (tout)Dilerefem1,2*DfcHlorotthtnt

jtanofwT7l .1-Triehloro«th«n«Carbon Tttrachlorldc•ronodUMerometh»ne1.2*DlchleropreD«nccff1.S-D(c^loroprop«ne

TrUMoroethtnt! Otbrofnochlerom»th»ne

1,1.2-TrIchloPo«thtrwIvnienetrirwIjS-DtcMoropropefW

Iromofom4*Kethyl-2-P*nt»f»fte2*N*K»noncTttr»chtero«thtnt

,2.2*Tetr«chLoro«tK»neTtf(u»ntChlorobenztn*Cthytbtntm

ttyrtntXytent (total)

Totum*-d,•romofluorobentenc

1,2-Pichterotth*n*-d«

0.0100.100D.I 00b.oio0.0100.010

0.0100.1000.2000.0100.2000.1003.0100.1000.100}.2003.0103.2000.3000.1000.1000.5000.1000.1000.0100.010D.200

0.300

0.400

0.500

0.100

0.300

D.300

0.010

0.200

0.010

Initial tol.^yc//7ftiw

Rf

X/tt

XRSD

lU

*v

7

Cont. tol*.

>7fe^^3i?RF n

-

•

tot. Cat.

IP

-

» •

!

C t. Cat.

—

tr » •

Cont. Cal*

RP tt ' • •

Affected

Reviewer's tnft/Date;

S Xinfnjt telitlvt Responst Fftcter.s Then ftagi should be »ppt(«d to the knalyte* on the tv^pte tfita »he*ts.J/t * Alt positive reftultt are estimated, mjm »nd non-detected result! are unusable

Documents

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY / / / T